Trial reportHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2020
Preferences for interventions designed to increase cervical screening uptake in non-attending young women: How findings from a discrete choice experiment compare with observed behaviours in a trial.
Trial report in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Current Practices for Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Pooled it
- Preferences for interventions designed to increase cervical screening uptake in non-attending young women: How findings from a discrete choice experiment compare with observed behaviours in a trial.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Trial
- Women's preferences for cervical cancer screening methods: a discrete choice experiment in Estonia and France.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- How would Australian women and people with a cervix like to access self-collection for cervical screening? Screening preferences from a national survey.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Women's preferences for HPV self-sampling in cervical cancer screening: a discrete choice experiment.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Rural women's preferences for cervical cancer screening via HPV self-sampling: a discrete choice experiment study in chidamoyo, Hurungwe District, Zimbabwe.AJOG global reports · 2024Article
- Health inequalities in cancer care: a literature review of pathways to diagnosis in the United Kingdom.EClinicalMedicine · 2024Review
- How do young women approaching screening age interpret the NHS cervical screening leaflet? A mixed methods study of identifying interpretation difficulties, barriers, facilitators, and leaflet interpretation, engagement and future screening behaviour.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- Lack of Awareness, Body Confidence and Connotations of Sex: An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of Barriers Affecting the Decision to Attend Initial Cervical Cancer Screening.The journal of behavioral health services & research · 2023Article
- Nomogram to Predict Radiation Enteritis in Cervical Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Cancer management and research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundYoung women's attendance at cervical screening in the UK is continuing to fall, and the incidence of invasive cervical cancer is rising.
objectivesWe assessed the preferences of non-attending young women for alternative ways of delivering cervical screening.
designPostal discrete choice experiment (DCE) conducted during the STRATEGIC study of interventions for increasing cervical screening uptake. Attributes included action required to arrange a test, location of the test, availability of a nurse navigator and cost to the National Health Service. SETTING AND
participantsNon-attending young women in two UK regions.
main outcome measuresResponses were analysed using a mixed multinomial logit model. A predictive analysis identified the most preferable strategy compared to current screening. Preferences from the DCE were compared with observed behaviours during the STRATEGIC trial.
resultsThe DCE response rate was 5.5% (222/4000), and 94% of respondents agreed screening is important. Preference heterogeneity existed around attributes with strong evidence for test location. Relative to current screening, unsolicited self-sampling kits for home use appeared most preferable. The STRATEGIC trial showed this same intervention to be most effective although many women who received it and were screened, attended for conventional cytology instead.
conclusionsThe DCE and trial identified the unsolicited self-sampling kit as the most preferred/effective intervention. The DCE suggested that the decision of some women receiving the kit in the trial to attend for conventional cytology may be due to anxieties around home testing coupled with a knowledge that ignoring the kit could potentially have life-changing consequences.
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.