ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2021
Trend analysis of process quality indicators for the Korean National Cervical Cancer Screening Program from 2005 to 2013.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of the transition to HPV-based primary screening in Portugal's organized cervical cancer screening program: A controlled interrupted time-series analysis (2014-2023).Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Cervical cancer burden in India: A descriptive epidemiological study and policy insights.Global epidemiology · 2025Article
- Current Status of the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea: History, Achievements, and Future Directions.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2025Article
- Identification of over- and undertreatment in the Dutch national cervical cancer screening program: A data linkage study at the hospital level.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Article
- Trends in cervical cancer screening rates among Korean women: results of the Korean National Cancer Screening Survey, 2005-2020.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2022Article
- A Comparative Analysis of Diagnostic Performance and Cytomorphologic Features Between Newly Developed WellPrepJournal of cytologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study sought to examine changes in trends for quality indicators of the population-based Korean National Cancer Screening Program (KNCSP) for cervical cancer from years 2005 to 2013.
methodsOur study data were derived from the KNCSP database. Cervical cancer diagnosis information was ascertained through linkage with the Korean National Cancer Registry and the KNCSP database. Performance measures for cervical cancer screening were estimated, including participation rate, positive rate, crude detection rate (CDR), interval cancer rate (ICR), positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and specificity. Joinpoint analysis was applied to calculate annual percentage changes (APCs) in all indicators according to socio-demographic factors.
resultsA significant increasing trend was noted in participation rates (APC=13.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI]=10.5, 16.4). PPV and specificity increased from years 2005 to 2009 and remained stable till 2013. An increasing trend was discovered in CDRs for cervical cancer in situ (APC=3.9%; 95% CI=1.0, 6.9), whereas a decreasing trend was observed in ICRs for invasive cervical cancer (APC=-2.5%; 95% CI=-4.5, -0.5). Medical Aid recipients and women older than 70 years showed the lowest participation rates, but higher CDRs and ICRs, compared to other groups. In general, most of the quality indicators for cervical cancer screening improved from 2005 to 2009 and remained stable to 2013.
conclusionThe KNCSP for cervical cancer in Korea has improved in terms of participation rate and accuracy of the screening test. These results may be attributed to the National Quality Improvement Program for KNCSP.
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.