Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31693128›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2019

Effect of Mailed Human Papillomavirus Test Kits vs Usual Care Reminders on Cervical Cancer Screening Uptake, Precancer Detection, and Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Rachel L Winer, John Lin, Jasmin A Tiro, Diana L Miglioretti, Tara Beatty, Hongyuan Gao, Kilian Kimbel, Chris Thayer, Diana S M Buist

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 54 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

NCT02005510 nacompletednot on this map

Randomized Trial of In-Home Cervical Cancer Screening in Underscreened Women

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of WashingtonRan2014 to 2018Enrolled19,851ConditionsCervical CancerArmsMailed in-home high-risk HPV testing kit, Usual care
NCT07214506 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Options to Promote Equity (HOPE)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ArizonaRan2026 to 2027Enrolled100ConditionsUterine Cervical Neoplasms, HPV Testing, Pap SmearArmsHuman papillomavirus Self-collection, Usual Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

54 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. A Mail-Based HPV Self-Collection Program to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening in Appalachia: Results of a Group Randomized Trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Performance and acceptability of self-collected human papillomavirus testing among women living with HIV.International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases · 2020
    Trial
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel L WinerDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle.
John LinDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle.
Jasmin A TiroDepartment of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Diana L MigliorettiKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Tara BeattyKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Hongyuan GaoKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Kilian KimbelKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Chris ThayerKaiser Permanente Washington, Renton.
Diana S M BuistKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle.
Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute · USUniversity of Washington · USKaiser Permanente · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · US

Funding

Randomized Trial of In-Home Cervical Cancer Screening in Underscreened WomenR01CA168598 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI WINER, RACHEL L. · 2013 to 2017
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA168598
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: In the United States, more than 50% of cervical cancers are diagnosed in underscreened women. Cervical cancer screening guidelines now include primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing as a recommended strategy. Home-based HPV self-sampling is a viable option for increasing screening compliance and effectiveness; however, US data are needed to inform health care system implementation. Objective: To evaluate effectiveness of mailed HPV self-sampling kits vs usual care reminders for in-clinic screening to increase detection and treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2+) and uptake of cervical cancer screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted in Kaiser Permanente Washington, a US integrated health care delivery system. Women aged 30 to 64 years with health plan enrollment for 3 years and 5 months or more, a primary care clinician, no Papanicolaou test within 3 years and 5 months, and no hysterectomy were identified through electronic medical records and enrolled from February 25, 2014, to August 29, 2016, with follow-up through February 26, 2018. Interventions: The control group received usual care (annual patient reminders and ad hoc outreach from primary care clinics). The intervention group received usual care plus a mailed HPV self-sampling kit. Main Outcomes and Measures: Two primary outcomes were (1) CIN2+ detection within 6 months of screening and (2) treatment within 6 months of CIN2+ detection. Screening uptake within 6 months of randomization was a secondary outcome. Results: A total of 19 851 women (mean [SD] age, 50.1 [9.5] years) were included, with 9960 randomized to the intervention group and 9891 randomized to the control group. All women randomized were included in analysis. In the intervention group, 12 participants with CIN2+ were detected compared with 8 in the control group (relative risk, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.61-3.64) and 12 cases were treated vs 7 in the control group (relative risk, 1.70; 95% CI, 0.67-4.32). Screening uptake was higher in the intervention group (2618 participants [26.3%] vs 1719 participants [17.4%]; relative risk, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.43-1.60). Conclusions and Relevance: Mailing HPV kits to underscreened women increased screening uptake compared with usual care alone, with no significant differences in precancer detection or treatment. Results support the feasibility of mailing HPV kits to women who are overdue for screening as an outreach strategy to increase screening uptake in US health care systems. Efforts to increase kit uptake and follow-up of positive results are warranted to maximize detection and treatment of CIN2+. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02005510.

Indexed as

AdultEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePostal ServiceReagent Kits, DiagnosticTreatment Adherence and ComplianceUterine Cervical NeoplasmsReagent Kits, Diagnostic

Identifiers

PMID31693128
PMCPMC6865279
OpenAlexW2986018635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.