Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31251820›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2020

Anxiety and distress following receipt of results from routine HPV primary testing in cervical screening: The psychological impact of primary screening (PIPS) study.

Emily McBride, Laura A V Marlow, Alice S Forster, Deborah Ridout, Henry Kitchener, Julietta Patnick, Jo Waller

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Emily McBrideResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9926-429X
Laura A V MarlowResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1709-2397
Alice S ForsterResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9933-7919
Deborah RidoutPopulation, Policy and Practice Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1336-6450
Henry KitchenerWomen's Cancer Centre, Institute of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Julietta PatnickCancer Epidemiology Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Jo WallerResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Institute of Epidemiology and Health Care, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4025-9132

Funding

Cancer Research UK 17429Cancer Research UK C49896/A17429Cancer Research UK C7492/A17219Department of Health DRF-2017-10-105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We used a cross-sectional survey to examine short-term anxiety and distress in women receiving different results following routine human papillomavirus (HPV) primary testing at cervical screening. Participants were women aged 24-65 (n = 1,127) who had attended screening at one of five sites piloting HPV primary screening in England, including a control group with normal cytology who were not tested for HPV. Women completed a postal questionnaire ~2 weeks after receiving their screening result. Unadjusted mean anxiety scores ranged from 32.9 (standard deviation [SD] = 12.2) in HPV-negative women to 42.1 (SD = 14.9) in women who were HPV-positive with abnormal cytology. In adjusted analyses, anxiety was significantly higher in women testing HPV-positive with either normal cytology (mean difference [MD] = 3.5, CI: 0.6-6.4) or abnormal cytology (MD = 7.2, CI: 3.7-10.6), than the control group. Distress was slightly higher in women who tested HPV-positive with abnormal cytology (MD = 0.9, CI: 0.02-1.8), than the control group. We also found increased odds of very high anxiety in women who tested HPV-positive with normal or abnormal cytology compared to the control group. This pattern of results was only observed among women receiving their first HPV-positive result, not among women found to have persistent HPV at 12-month follow-up. Testing HPV-positive with normal cytology for the first time, is associated with elevated anxiety despite carrying very low immediate cervical cancer risk. However, receiving the same test result at 12-month early recall does not appear to be associated with higher anxiety, suggesting anxiety may normalise with repeated exposure and/or over time.

Indexed as

AdultAnxietyCervix UteriCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsPrecancerous ConditionsRiskStress, PsychologicalSurveys and QuestionnairesUterine Cervical DysplasiaVaginal Smearscancer screeninghuman papillomaviruspsychological impactpsychological wellbeingwomen

Identifiers

PMID31251820
PMCPMC7065242

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.