ArticleObstetrics & gynecology science2022
Adherence to the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology guidelines: an observational study.
Article in Obstetrics & gynecology science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Disparities in gynecological care capacity in China: a national assessment using the structure-process-outcome framework.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Impact of management guidelines for abnormal cervical cytology on colposcopy procedure rates among young women.Gynecologic oncology · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe 2012 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) guidelines were developed to provide guidance regarding cervical pathology and to minimize overtreatment of lesions that may resolve spontaneously. We aimed to evaluate the adherence to these guidelines with referrals for colposcopy at a large academic center and to understand the factors associated with incorrect referrals.
methodsThis retrospective observational study involved women referred to the Virginia Commonwealth University for colposcopy or loop electrosurgical excision procedure from January 2015 to December 2016.
resultsReferral requests from 430 women were reviewed. Among these, 17.4% were discordant with the ASCCP guidelines. The most common discordant colposcopy referrals were low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (48%) and atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (29%). The possibility of incorrect referrals was decreased among highgrade lesions (odds ratio [OR], 0.03), while it was increased in women aged <25 years (OR, 31.6) and in those referred by family medicine (OR, 3.6) or internal medicine (OR, 4.4). Ten patients were referred for cervical cytology results of samples collected from the vaginal cuffs despite hysterectomies performed for benign lesions.
conclusionPatients referred outside of the guidelines were most often women aged <25 years with low-grade lesions. Referrals outside evidence-based guidelines may lead to unnecessary procedures and additional healthcare expenses. Our results help identify the areas for provider education and potential areas of concern regarding the implementation of the 2019 ASCCP guideline updates.
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.