ArticleJAMA internal medicine2020
Prevalence of Potentially Unnecessary Bimanual Pelvic Examinations and Papanicolaou Tests Among Adolescent Girls and Young Women Aged 15-20 Years in the United States.
Article in JAMA internal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Delayed Visits for Contraception Due to Concerns Regarding Pelvic Examination Among Women with History of Intimate Partner Violence.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Trial
- Is age a determinant in cervical cancer screening in women aged 18 to 29?: An observational study.Medicine · 2025Observational
- Unsupervised clustering analysis of comprehensive health status and its influencing factors on women of childbearing age: a cross-sectional study from a province in central China.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Point-of-care diagnosis of cervical cancer: potential protein biomarkers in cervicovaginal fluid.Turkish journal of biology = Turk biyoloji dergisi · 2022Review
- De-implementation of cervical cancer screening before age 21.Preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Unindicated cervical cancer screening in adolescent females within a large healthcare system in the United States.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2021Article
- Trends in the use of cervical cancer screening tests in a large medical claims database, United States, 2013-2019.Gynecologic oncology · 2021Article
- The changing landscape of cancer in the USA - opportunities for advancing prevention and treatment.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020Review
- Association of Low-Value Testing With Subsequent Health Care Use and Clinical Outcomes Among Low-risk Primary Care Outpatients Undergoing an Annual Health Examination.JAMA internal medicine · 2020Observational
- A Pot Ignored Boils On: Sustained Calls for Explicit Consent of Intimate Medical Exams.HEC forum : an interdisciplinary journal on hospitals' ethical and legal issues · 2020Article
- [How to get out of the way: The unfinished subject].Atencion primariaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Pelvic examination is no longer recommended for asymptomatic, nonpregnant women and may cause harms such as false-positive test results, overdiagnosis, anxiety, and unnecessary costs. The bimanual pelvic examination (BPE) is an invasive and controversial examination component. Cervical cancer screening is not recommended for women younger than 21 years. Objectives: To estimate prevalence of potentially unnecessary BPE and Papanicolaou (Pap) tests performed among adolescent girls and women younger than 21 years (hereinafter referred to as young women) in the United States and to identify factors associated with receiving these examinations. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional analysis of the National Survey of Family Growth from September 2011 through September 2017 focused on a population-based sample of young women aged 15 to 20 years (n = 3410). The analysis used survey weights to estimate prevalence and the number of people represented in the US population. Data were analyzed from December 21, 2018, through September 3, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Receipt of a BPE or a Pap test in the last 12 months and the proportion of potentially unnecessary examinations and tests. Results: Responses from 3410 young women aged 15 to 20 years were included in the analysis with 6-year sampling weights applied. Among US young women aged 15 to 20 years represented during the 2011-2017 study period, 4.8% (95% CI, 3.9%-5.9%) were pregnant, 22.3% (95% CI, 20.1%-24.6%) had undergone STI testing, and 4.5% (95% CI, 3.6%-5.5%) received treatment or medication for an STI in the past 12 months (Table 1). Only 2.0% (95% CI, 1.4%-2.9%) reported using an IUD, and 33.5% (95% CI, 30.8%-36.4%) used at least 1 other type of hormonal contraception in the past 12 months. Among US young women aged 15 to 20 years who were surveyed in the years 2011 through 2017, approximately 2.6 million (22.9%; 95% CI, 20.7%-25.3%) reported having received a BPE in the last 12 months. Approximately half of these examinations (54.4%; 95% CI, 48.8%-59.9%) were potentially unnecessary, representing an estimated 1.4 million individuals. Receipt of a BPE was associated with having a Pap test (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR], 7.12; 95% CI, 5.56-9.12), testing for sexually transmitted infections (aPR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.34-1.90), and using hormonal contraception other than an intrauterine device (aPR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.11-1.54). In addition, an estimated 2.2 million young women (19.2%; 95% CI, 17.2%-21.4%) reported having received a Pap test in the past 12 months, and 71.9% (95% CI, 66.0%-77.1%) of these tests were potentially unnecessary. Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis found that more than half of BPEs and almost three-quarters of Pap tests performed among young women aged 15 to 20 years during the years 2011 through 2017 were potentially unnecessary, exposing women to preventable harms. The results suggest that compliance with the current professional guidelines regarding the appropriate use of these examinations and tests may be lacking.
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.