ArticlePreventive medicine reports2022
The impact of offering multiple cervical screening options to women whose screening was overdue in Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Self-Collected Vaginal Specimens for HPV Testing: Recommendations From the Enduring Consensus Cervical Cancer Screening and Management Guidelines Committee.Journal of lower genital tract disease · 2025Guideline
- Identifying optimum implementation for human papillomavirus self-sampling in underserved communities: A systematic review.Journal of medical screening · 2025Pooled it
- Does self-sampling for human papilloma virus testing have the potential to increase cervical cancer screening? An updated meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- '…but look how many lives would have been saved if this was available then' Exploring the acceptability of future Human Papillomavirus self-sampling, and the barriers and facilitators of cervical cancer screening for those with intellectual disabilities in Scotland.British journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparison of diagnostic accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling devices for human Papillomavirus detection: A systematic review.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Most women who develop cancer have not been screened regularly. One in four women in Scotland, is overdue for cervical screening. Aim was to assess the impact of offering multiple cervical screening options to women whose screening is overdue. A prospective cohort study including all women whose screening was overdue, aged 30-60 years in Dumfries and Galloway in 2012. Potentially eligible women (n = 4146) were identified split into six groups. Women aged 30-55 years were allocated to three different groups. Group 1 (letter, n = 1246), Group 2 (letter and kit, n = 221), Group 3 (letter, n = 2031). Women aged 56-60 years were allocated to: Group 4 (letter, n = 292), Group 5 (letter and kit, n = 292) and Group 6 (control, n = 64). Women who self-collected a vaginal sample were requested to complete a questionnaire. The percentages of women responding were 24 % (21-26), 32 % (25-38), 16 % (14-18), 15 % (11-20) and 12 % (9-17) in groups 1 to 5 respectively, compared with 3 % (0-11) among controls. A significantly higher number of women (n = 383, 10 % of 3815) opted for self-sampling in comparison with undergoing a cervical screening test (CST) at the GP practice (n = 197, 5 %, x
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.