Trial reportSichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition2022
[Effectiveness of Different Testing Strategies Applied for Cervical Cancer Screening in Shuangliu District, Chengdu City].
Trial report in Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adjunctive role of p16/Ki-67 dual-stain cytology in colposcopy referral pathways for cervical precancer and persistent high-risk HPV infection.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- [TruScreen Combined With High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing vs Thinprep Cytology Test Combined With High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening: A Comparative Clinical Study].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical value of different combination strategies of high-risk HPV (hr-HPV) testing and Thinprep cytology test (TCT), a cervical cytology test, for cervical cancer screening, especially for high or higher-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL Methods: The study is a population-based randomized clinical trial. Women aged 35 to 65 years meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled for the study. At the baseline screening conducted in the first year, the participants were randomly assigned to either cytology test or hr-HPV testing at a ratio of 1∶2. If the paticipants had positive results for the baseline hr-HPV test, they would then undergo either cytology test or colposcopy by random assignment. After 24 months, all participants were called back, and combined screening of cytology test and hr-HPV test were performed. Women who had negative results at baseline screening and who entered and completed the third-year follow-up were selected as the subjects of the study. Based on the aforementioned testing findings, the related data were extracted and four different screening protocols were simulated: 1) combined TCT and hr-HPV screening, with referral for colposcopy when there was positive results for either one of the two; 2) combined TCT and hr-HPV screening, with referral for colposcopy when both tests had positive results at the same time; 3) TCT was done for preliminary screening and those who were found to be positive would then undergo hr-HPV test for triage purpose, with subsequent referral made for colposcopy if the hr-HPV results were positive; 4) hr-HPV was done for preliminary screening and those who were found to be positive would then undergo TCT, with subsequent referral made for colposcopy if TCT results were positive. With the detection of HSIL Results: A total of 3102 women were screened, and 2967 women were included in the statistical analysis in this study. Among the 2967 women, 979 were randomized to cytology and 1988 to hr-HPV genotyping. For prescreening, the positive rate of the cytology group was 5.6% (55/979), with of HSIL Conclusion: This randomized clinical trial from Shuangliu District, Chengdu City shows that the sensitivity of hr-HPV testing is better than that of cytology test, and the prevalence of HSIL
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.