ArticleBMJ open2019
Impact of screening on cervical cancer incidence in England: a time trend analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers to uptake of cervical cancer screening among women in Nigeria: a systematic review.African health sciences · 2022Pooled it
- Effect of Self-Sampling HPV DNA Testing on Cervical Cancer Screening in Singapore's Primary Care: Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of family medicine · 2026Trial
- Primary Pap Smear Cytological Diagnosis of ASC-US: HR-HPV Genotyping and Follow-Up of HPV-Positive Patients.Cancers · 2026Article
- Histopathological Verification of Abnormal Cytology Results Suggesting High-Grade Intraepithelial Lesions in Women over 50 Years of Age-Evaluation of the Clinical Utility of Conventional Gynecological Cytology.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- MicroRNA-Based Liquid Biopsy for Cervical Cancer Diagnostics and Treatment Monitoring.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Cervical cancer screening by cytology and the burden of epithelial abnormalities in low resource settings: a tertiary-center 42-year study.BMC women's health · 2024Article
- Years of life lost due to cancer in the United Kingdom from 1988 to 2017.British journal of cancer · 2023Article
- Article
- HPV and Cervical Cancer: A Review of Epidemiology and Screening Uptake in the UK.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Hospital resource utilisation from HPV-related diseases in England: a real-world cost analysis.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Article
- Cervical smear uptake in Black, Asian and minority ethnic and learning disability populations.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2022Article
- False Negative Results in Cervical Cancer Screening-Risks, Reasons and Implications for Clinical Practice and Public Health.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Disparities in the increases of cervical cancer incidence rates: observations from a city-wide population-based study.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Experiences of cervical screening participation and non-participation in women from minority ethnic populations in Scotland.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Risk factors of cervical cancer after a negative cytological diagnosis in Polish cervical cancer screening programme.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
- Gynaecological cancers and their cell lines.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2021Review
- National action towards a world free of cervical cancer for all women.Preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Integrated Bioinformatical Analysis Identifies GIMAP4 as an Immune-Related Prognostic Biomarker Associated With Remodeling in Cervical Cancer Tumor Microenvironment.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- The role and contribution of treatment and imaging modalities in global cervical cancer management: survival estimates from a simulation-based analysis.The Lancet. Oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo better model underlying trends in cervical cancer incidence so as to model past trends, to estimate the impact of cervical screening on cervical cancer rates at different ages and to obtain a counterfactual baseline under a no-screening scenario.
designTrend analysis of cancer registry data recorded between 1971 and 2013.
settingEngland.
participants132 493 women aged 20-84 with a diagnosis of cervical cancer. OUTCOME MEASURE: Cervical cancer incidence data were modelled using a modified age period cohort model able to capture both increased exposure to human papillomavirus (HPV) as well as changes in the age of exposure to HPV in young cohorts. Observed rates were compared with counterfactual baseline rates under a no-screening scenario to estimate the protective effect of screening.
resultsRates of cervical cancer incidence have been decreasing since the introduction of screening but are projected to increase in the future under the current scenario. Between 1988 and 2013, it was estimated that screening had prevented approximately 65 000 cancers. Moreover, in 2013, the age-standardised rate (ASR) estimated under the no-screening scenario (37.9, 95% CI 37.4 to 38.3) was threefold higher among women aged 20-84 than the observed ASR (12.8, 95% CI 12.3 to 13.3). We estimate that the age of first HPV exposure has decreased by about 1 year every decade since the early 1970s (women born in 1955 onwards).
conclusionsOur results corroborated the importance of screening in preventing cervical cancer and indicated future rates are dependent on age at HPV exposure. Estimated future rates can be used for healthcare planning while the counterfactual baseline to quantify the impact of HPV vaccination in microsimulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.