Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35171941›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Cervical cancer screening and treatment, HIV infection, and age: Program implementation in seven regions of Namibia.

Abigail K Korn, Laura Muzingwani, Gillian O'Bryan, Alison Ensminger, Ashley D Boylan, Eva-Liisa Kafidi, Matheus Kashali, Laimi Ashipala, Anne-Marie Nitschke, Eric J Dziuban and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Health system constraints in cervical cancer prevention in rural Namibia: A qualitative study.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
  7. The miRNomics of antiretroviral therapy-induced obesity.Functional & integrative genomics · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Abigail K KornInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4641-2986
Laura MuzingwaniInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Windhoek, Namibia.
Gillian O'BryanInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Alison EnsmingerInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2627-6764
Ashley D BoylanU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Windhoek, Namibia.
Eva-Liisa KafidiInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Windhoek, Namibia.ORCID 0000-0002-4070-8332
Matheus KashaliMinistry of Health and Social Services-Namibia (MoHSS), Windhoek, Namibia.
Laimi AshipalaMinistry of Health and Social Services-Namibia (MoHSS), Windhoek, Namibia.
Anne-Marie NitschkeMinistry of Health and Social Services-Namibia (MoHSS), Windhoek, Namibia.
Eric J DziubanU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Windhoek, Namibia.
Norbert ForsterInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Windhoek, Namibia.
Linda O EckertInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1357-8405
Gabrielle O'MalleyInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7514-8240
University of Washington · USMinistry of Health and Social Services · NA

Funding

CGH CDC HHS U2G GH001430PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess differences in cervical cancer screening and treatment outcomes by HIV status in a routine programmatic setting with a high generalized HIV prevalence. Women living with HIV (WLHIV) are at heightened risk of developing cervical cancer and the World Health Organization recommends all WLHIV who are sexually active be screened, regardless of age. In 2018, Namibia's Ministry of Health and Social Services introduced a screen-and-treat approach using visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) and ablative treatment with cryotherapy or thermocoagulation with a focus on screening HIV-positive women due to Namibia's 11.5% prevalence of HIV in women aged 15-49. Using program data from October 2018 to March 2020 from seven of the country's 14 regions, we calculated descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to test the statistical significance of differences in VIA-positivity, ineligibility for ablative treatment, treatment completion, and same day treatment completion by HIV status. Between October 2018 and March 2020, the program conducted 14,786 cervical cancer screenings. Among 8,150 women who received their first VIA screening, more WLHIV screened VIA-positive (17%) than HIV-negative women (15%). This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.02). Among 2,272 women who screened VIA-positive at any screening, 1,159 (82%) completed ablative treatment. This suggests ablative treatment is feasible and acceptable in resource-limited settings. WLHIV were also more likely to complete treatment than HIV-negative women (p<0.01). Differences in health seeking behavior of sub-populations as well as resource availability between service delivery points should be considered for further investigation. Going forward in order to strengthen program implementation and expand screening access and uptake further investigation is needed to determine cancer incidence by HIV status, age, and time since last screening to assess cases that are averted as well as potential rates of overtreatment.

Indexed as

Health Plan ImplementationAdolescentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesCryotherapyDelivery of Health CareEarly Detection of CancerElectrocoagulationFemaleHIVHIV InfectionsHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedNamibiaUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID35171941
PMCPMC8849510
OpenAlexW4213154228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.