ArticleTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology2021
Obstetrician-gynecologists' practice patterns regarding HPV testing in cervical cancer screening in Turkey.
Article in Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Knowledge About Human Papillomavirus and Vaccination Among Women Screened for Cervical Cancer.The International journal of health planning and management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine obstetrician-gynecologists' (OBGYNs) practice patterns regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in cervical cancer screening. Secondly, we aimed to examine OBGYNs' adherence to guidelines in the management of women with HPV-positive test results. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study was a cross-sectional survey conducted in Antalya and Istanbul provinces in Turkey using a self-reported questionnaire. A 12-item questionnaire form was administered to the participants in face-to-face interviews. Of the targeted participants, 343 OBGYNs completed the questionnaire.
resultsThe majority of participants, (81.0%) stated that they offered/used HPV testing in cervical cancer screening. Of those, most OBGYNs (89.9%) preferred to use HPV testing concomitant with cervical cytology (co-testing) whereas only 10.1% preferred to use HPV testing alone (primary HPV testing). The most preferred screening intervals for women with HPV-negative results were 5 years (53.4%) and 3 years (19.9%), respectively. In compliance with the guidelines, the rate of participants who recommended "referral directly to colposcopy" for women who were HPV16/18-positive and cytology-negative; and "co-testing at 12 months" for women who were positive for HPV genotypes other than HPV16/18 and cytology-negative was 53.1%. Multivariate analysis revealed that the "professional working setting" was the sole independent determinant of the adherence to the guidelines. OBGYNs working in private settings had the worst adherence rate (42.4%).
conclusionPrimary HPV testing is not yet widespread among Turkish OBGYNs. Moreover, adherence to practice guidelines in the management of HPVpositive test results is relatively low. There is a need for continuing medical education regarding screening programs and the management of women with positive screening results.
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.