Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33198721›Full record

SynthesisBMC women's health2020

Screening test accuracy of portable devices that can be used to perform colposcopy for detecting CIN2+ in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Katayoun Taghavi, Eliane Rohner, Partha Basu, Nicola Low, Anne Rutjes, Julia Bohlius

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC women's health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Katayoun TaghaviInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland. Katayoun.taghavi@ispm.unibe.ch.ORCID 0000-0003-0812-0069
Eliane RohnerInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Partha BasuScreening Group, Early Detection and Prevention Section, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Nicola LowInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Anne RutjesInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Julia BohliusInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Mittelstrasse 43, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

Observational Antiretroviral Studies In Southern Africa (OASIS) CollaborationU01AI069924 · NIAID · UNIVERSITAT BERN · PI Cleophas Chimbetete, Mary-Ann Davies · 2006 to 2026
$55.9M
NIAID NIH HHS U01 AI069924World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPortable devices that can be used to perform colposcopy may improve cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where access to colposcopy is limited. The objective of this study was to systematically review the diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of these devices for the detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+).

methodsIn accordance with our protocol (Prospero CRD42018104286), we searched Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials up to 9/2019. We included DTA studies, which investigated portable devices with moderate-to-high optical magnification (≥ 6×) for colposcopy, as described in the manual for Colposcopy and Treatment by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with a histopathological reference standard. We used the QUADAS-2 tool to assess study quality. We examined results for sensitivity and specificity in paired forest plots, stratified by stages in the clinical pathway. We pooled estimates of test accuracy for the index test, used as an add-on to other tests, using a bivariate random-effect model.

resultsWe screened 1737 references and assessed 239 full-text articles for eligibility. Five single-gate DTA studies, including 2693 women, met the inclusion criteria. Studies evaluated two devices (Gynocular™ and Pocket) at different stages of the screening pathway. In three studies, which used the index test in an add-on capacity in 1273 women, we found a pooled sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI 0.55-0.92) and specificity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.59-0.94). The main sources of bias were partial verification, incorporation and classification bias.

conclusionFew studies have evaluated portable devices able to perform colposcopy, so their accuracy for the detection of CIN2+ remains uncertain. Future studies should include patient-relevant and long-term outcomes, including missed cases, overtreatment, residual and recurrent disease. To meet the challenge of eliminating cervical cancer in LMIC, methods for visual assessment of the cervix need urgent redress.

Indexed as

ColposcopyEarly Detection of CancerUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsDeveloping CountriesEquipment DesignFemaleHumansSensitivity and SpecificityCervical cancer screeningColposcopyLow- and middle-income countriesSensitivitySpecificity

Identifiers

PMID33198721
PMCPMC7670616

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.