Trial reportJCO global oncology2022
Safety and Acceptability of Three Ablation Treatments for High-Grade Cervical Precancer: Early Data From a Randomized Noninferiority Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JCO global oncology, 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Innovative Treatment for Cervical Precancer: A Qualitative Evaluation using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.Global implementation research and applications · 2026Article
- Development of a Cervical Cancer Screening Program in Rural Guatemala.Global health, science and practice · 2025Article
- Comparison of the efficacy and adverse events between argon-helium cryoablation and microwave ablation for non-small cell lung cancer: a propensity score matching study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- A mixed-methods preliminary evaluation of an innovative treatment for cervical precancer in El Salvador's screen-and-treat program.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Gynecologic infection rates after ablation treatment for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 and higher (CIN2+): Secondary analysis of a non-inferiority randomized trial.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Affordable cancer technologies: Lessons learned from the design and implementation of two randomized clinical trials to develop innovative treatments for cervical precancer.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis ongoing trial is comparing the efficacy and safety of three ablation treatments for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher. Here, we present early data regarding pain, side effects, and acceptability of CO MATERIALS AND
methodsThis noninferiority randomized trial is taking place in El Salvador, China, and Colombia. Patients are 1,152 eligible women with biopsy-confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher who will receive one of three ablation treatments. Pain is measured before, during, and after treatment with a visual analog scale (1-10). Side effects and acceptability are assessed at 6 weeks.
resultsTo date, 1,024 of 1,152 (89%) women were randomly assigned to treatment. The median pain level was higher during TA (4, IQR = 4) than CO
conclusionDespite differences in pain and side effects across ablation treatments, all were safe and highly acceptable to patients. In addition to efficacy, considerations such as cost and portability may be more significant in choosing a treatment method.
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.