Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31815615›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2019

Comparison of two invitation-based methods for human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling with usual care among un- and under-screened Māori, Pacific and Asian women: study protocol for a randomised controlled community trial to examine the effect of self-sampling on participation in cervical-cancer screening.

Naomi Brewer, Karen Bartholomew, Anna Maxwell, Jane Grant, Georgina McPherson, Helen Wihongi, Collette Bromhead, Nina Scott, Sue Crengle, Chris Cunningham and 2 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. HPV Self-sampling in Indigenous Communities: A Scoping Review.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Naomi BrewerCentre for Public Health Research, College of Health, Massey University, PO Box 756, Wellington, 6140, New Zealand. N.Brewer@massey.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0003-4159-3570
Karen BartholomewWaitematā District Health Board (DHB) and Auckland DHB, Private Bag 93-503, Takapuna, Auckland, 0740, New Zealand.
Anna MaxwellWaitematā District Health Board (DHB) and Auckland DHB, Private Bag 93-503, Takapuna, Auckland, 0740, New Zealand.
Jane GrantWaitematā District Health Board (DHB) and Auckland DHB, Private Bag 93-503, Takapuna, Auckland, 0740, New Zealand.
Georgina McPherson
Helen WihongiWaitematā District Health Board (DHB) and Auckland DHB, Private Bag 93-503, Takapuna, Auckland, 0740, New Zealand.
Collette BromheadSchool of Health Sciences, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Nina ScottUniversity of Auckland, Waikato District Health Board, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Sue CrengleDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Chris CunninghamResearch Centre for Māori Health and Development, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Jeroen DouwesCentre for Public Health Research, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.
John D PotterCentre for Public Health Research, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.

Funding

Health Research Council of New Zealand 16/405
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMāori, Pacific and Asian women in New Zealand have lower cervical-cancer screening rates than European women, and there are persistent inequities in cervical cancer outcomes for Māori and Pacific women. Innovative ways to address access barriers are required. New Zealand is transitioning to screening with human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing, which could allow women themselves, rather than a clinician, to take the sample. Internationally, self-sampling has been found to increase screening participation rates. The aim of this open-label community-based randomised controlled trial is to investigate whether self-sampling increases screening participation among un- and under-screened Māori, Pacific and Asian women in New Zealand. METHODS/

designWe aim to invite at least 3550 un- or under-screened (≥5 years overdue) Māori, Pacific and Asian women (1050, 1250, 1250 respectively), aged 30-69 years, for screening. The three study arms are: usual care in which women are invited to attend a clinic for a standard clinician-collected cytology test; clinic-based self-sampling in which women are invited to take a self-sample at their usual general practice; and mail-out self-sampling in which women are mailed a kit and invited to take a self-sample at home. Women will be randomised 3:3:1 to the clinic and mail-out self-sampling groups, and usual care. There is also a nested sub-study in which non-responding women in all allocation groups, when they subsequently present to the clinic for other reasons, are offered clinic or home-kit self-sampling. The primary outcome will be the proportion of women who participate (by taking a self-sample or cytology test). DISCUSSION: This trial is the first to evaluate the effectiveness of mailed self-sampling in New Zealand and will be one of the first internationally to evaluate the effectiveness of opportunistic in-clinic invitations for self-sampling. The trial will provide robust evidence on the impact on participation proportions from different invitation approaches for HPV self-sampling in New Zealand un- and under-screened Māori, Pacific and Asian women.

trial registrationANZCTR Identifier: ACTRN12618000367246 (date registered 12/3/2018) https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371741&isReview=true; UTN: U1111-1189-0531.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAsian PeopleEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNew ZealandPapillomaviridaePapillomavirus InfectionsPatient Acceptance of Health CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf CareSpecimen HandlingUterine Cervical NeoplasmsVaginal SmearsCervical screeningClinic-basedHome-basedHPV DNA testingParticipationSelf-sample

Identifiers

PMID31815615
PMCPMC6902319

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.