ArticleBMC medicine2019
Introduction of primary screening using high-risk HPV DNA detection in the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based cohort study.
Article in BMC medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 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
84 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cost-effectiveness studies evaluating HPV self-sampling for cervical cancer screening - a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Trial
- Randomized Implementation of a Primary Human Papillomavirus Testing-based Cervical Cancer Screening Protocol for Women 34 to 69 Years in Norway.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2022Trial
- Triage Performance of FAM19A4/miR124-2 Methylation: 18-Month Follow-Up Results From a Prospective Observational Study Within the Dutch Primary HPV-Based Cervical Screening Program.International journal of cancer · 2026Observational
- Long-Term Regional Pathology-Detection Trends in High-Grade Cervical Lesions and Cervical Squamous Cell Carcinoma Among Women Aged 40-69 Years in Northern Norway, 1998-2025.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Balancing diagnostic accuracy and cost in the follow-up of histological low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- PAX1 and ZNF582 Methylation as a Triage Strategy in Cytologic and hrHPV+ Scrapings in Both Chinese and Dutch Cohorts.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Loop electrosurgical excision procedure and perinatal outcomes post-human papillomavirus cervical screening: A longitudinal cohort study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Primary Human Papillomavirus Screening Versus Cytology for Detection of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia Grade 2 or Higher in Poland: a Parallel-Group, Randomized Controlled Trial.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Biology-aligned cervical cancer screening: target-centric biomarkers and next-generation diagnostic platforms.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of human papillomavirus (HPV) genotyping strategies for management of HPV-positive women in cervical cancer screening.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Effect of direct mailing self-sampling kits on participation in the Dutch hrHPV-based cervical screening programme: a population-based study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Women's preferences for cervical cancer screening methods: a discrete choice experiment in Estonia and France.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- A Multi-Stakeholder Perspective on Integrating Genomic Sequencing into Newborn Screening: An Interview Study.International journal of neonatal screening · 2026Article
- Under which realistic circumstances is hrHPV self-sampling increasing cervical screening effectiveness in a partly vaccinated population? A modelling study.International journal of cancer · 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
- Predictive Biomarkers for Asymptomatic Adults: Opportunities, Risks, and Guidance for General Practice.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Impact of Single- Versus Multiple-Type HPV Infections on Cervical Cytological and Histological Abnormalities: The Dominant Oncogenic Potential of HPV16 Single-Type Infections.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Minimally invasive diagnosis of precancerous cervical lesions using single-cell peripheral immune atlas.Cell reports. Medicine · 2025Article
24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn January 2017, the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme transitioned from cytomorphological to primary high-risk HPV (hrHPV) DNA screening, including the introduction of self-sampling, for women aged between 30 and 60 years. The Netherlands was the first country to switch to hrHPV screening at the national level. We investigated the health impact of this transition by comparing performance indicators from the new hrHPV-based programme with the previous cytology-based programme.
methodsWe obtained data from the Dutch nationwide network and registry of histo- and cytopathology (PALGA) for 454,573 women eligible for screening in 2017 who participated in the hrHPV-based programme between 1 January 2017 and 30 June 2018 (maximum follow-up of almost 21 months) and for 483,146 women eligible for screening in 2015 who participated in the cytology-based programme between 1 January 2015 and 31 March 2016 (maximum follow-up of 40 months). We compared indicators of participation (participation rate), referral (screen positivity; referral rate) and detection (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) detection; number of referrals per detected CIN lesion).
resultsParticipation in the hrHPV-based programme was significantly lower than that in the cytology-based programme (61% vs 64%). Screen positivity and direct referral rates were significantly higher in the hrHPV-based programme (positivity rate: 5% vs 9%; referral rate: 1% vs 3%). CIN2+ detection increased from 11 to 14 per 1000 women screened. Overall, approximately 2.2 times more clinical irrelevant findings (i.e. ≤CIN1) were found in the hrHPV-based programme, compared with approximately 1·3 times more clinically relevant findings (i.e. CIN2+); this difference was mostly due to a national policy change recommending colposcopy, rather than observation, of hrHPV-positive, ASC-US/LSIL results in the hrHPV-based programme.
conclusionsThis is the first time that comprehensive results of nationwide implementation of hrHPV-based screening have been reported using high-quality data with a long follow-up. We have shown that both benefits and potential harms are higher in one screening round of a well-implemented hrHPV-based screening programme than in an established cytology-based programme. Lower participation in the new hrHPV programme may be due to factors such as invitation policy changes and the phased roll-out of the new programme. Our findings add further to evidence from trials and modelling studies on the effectiveness of hrHPV-based screening.
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.