ArticleSystematic reviews2021
Screening for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer: protocol for systematic reviews to inform Canadian recommendations.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer: systematic reviews to inform an update to recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Cervical cancer survival prediction by machine learning algorithms: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Exploring the role of the oncology nurse in cervical cancer screening programs during times of transition.Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2025Article
- MicroRNA-Based Liquid Biopsy for Cervical Cancer Diagnostics and Treatment Monitoring.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Progress and Challenges in Canada's Path Toward the Elimination of Cervical Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
- Cervical Cancer Tissue Analysis Using Photothermal Midinfrared Spectroscopic Imaging.Chemical & biomedical imaging · 2024Article
- Determinants of Acquisition, Persistence, and Clearance of Oncogenic Cervical Human Papillomavirus Infection in the Philippines Using a Multi-Omics Approach: DEFEAT HPV Study Protocol.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparison of Ki67 index and P16 expression in different grades of cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions.Caspian journal of internal medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of the cervical biopsy under colposcopic vision.European journal of translational myology · 2022Article
- Identification of a Ferroptosis-Related Prognostic Gene PTGS2 Based on Risk Modeling and Immune Microenvironment of Early-Stage Cervical Cancer.Journal of oncology · 2022Article
- Liquid Biopsy in Cervical Cancer: Hopes and Pitfalls.Cancers · 2021Review
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 at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care on screening in primary care for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer by systematically reviewing evidence of (a) effectiveness; (b) test accuracy; (c) individuals' values and preferences; and (d) strategies aimed at improving screening rates.
methodsDe novo reviews will be conducted to evaluate effectiveness and to assess values and preferences. For test accuracy and strategies to improve screening rates, we will integrate studies from existing systematic reviews with search updates to the present. Two Cochrane reviews will provide evidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes from the conservative management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. We will search Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central (except for individuals' values and preferences, where Medline, Scopus, and EconLit will be searched) via peer-reviewed search strategies and the reference lists of included studies and reviews. We will search ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. Two reviewers will screen potentially eligible studies and agree on those to include. Data will be extracted by one reviewer with verification by another. Two reviewers will independently assess risk of bias and reach consensus. Where possible and suitable, we will pool studies via meta-analysis. We will compare accuracy data per outcome and per comparison using the Rutter and Gatsonis hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model and report relative sensitivities and specificities. Findings on values and preferences will be synthesized using a narrative synthesis approach and thematic analysis, depending on study designs. Two reviewers will appraise the certainty of evidence for all outcomes using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and come to consensus. DISCUSSION: The publication of guidance on screening in primary care for the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer by the Task Force in 2013 focused on cytology. Since 2013, new studies using human papillomavirus tests for cervical screening have been published that will improve our understanding of screening in primary care settings. This review will inform updated recommendations based on currently available studies and address key evidence gaps noted in our previous review.
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.