ArticleBJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology2022
Shift in harms and benefits of cervical cancer screening in the era of HPV screening and vaccination: a modelling study.
Article in BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Screening With Universal Access to Vaginal Self-Testing: Outcomes of an Implementation Trial.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Trial
- Under which realistic circumstances is hrHPV self-sampling increasing cervical screening effectiveness in a partly vaccinated population? A modelling study.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Review
- Recent US Gastric Cancer Prevention Recommendations: Advances, Unanswered Questions, and the Need for a Unified Approach.Gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Impact of a national HPV vaccination programme for preadolescent girls on cytology screening performance and CIN2+ incidence: five-year population-based cervical screening results from Slovenia.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025Article
- Shift in harms and benefits of cervical cancer screening in the era of HPV screening and vaccination: a modelling study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo calculate the changes in harms and benefits of cervical cancer screening over the first three screening rounds of the Dutch high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) screening programme.
designMicrosimulation study.
settingDutch hrHPV screening programme; women are invited for screening every 5 or 10 years (depending on age and screening history) from age 30 to 65. POPULATION: Partly vaccinated population of 100 million Dutch women.
methodsMicrosimulation model MISCAN was used to estimate screening effects. Sensitivity analyses were performed on test characteristics and attendance.
main outcome measuresHarms (screening tests, unnecessary referrals, treatment-related health problems), benefits (CIN2
resultsThe number of screening tests and CIN2
conclusionBoth harms and benefits of hrHPV screening decreased over the first screening rounds. For younger women, the efficiency would decrease, whereas longer screening intervals would lead to increased efficiency in older women. Programme efficiency overall remained stable, showing the importance of longer intervals for low-risk women. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Cervical cancer screening: both harms and benefits of hrHPV screening will decrease in the future.
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.