Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36634119›Full record

SynthesisPLoS medicine2023

Regional and country-level trends in cervical cancer screening coverage in sub-Saharan Africa: A systematic analysis of population-based surveys (2000-2020).

Lily Yang, Marie-Claude Boily, Minttu M Rönn, Dorcas Obiri-Yeboah, Imran Morhason-Bello, Nicolas Meda, Olga Lompo, Philippe Mayaud, Michael Pickles, Marc Brisson and 3 more

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Lily YangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population and Global Health, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Marie-Claude BoilyMedical Research Council Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3919-006X
Minttu M RönnDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9292-5670
Dorcas Obiri-YeboahMicrobiology and Immunology Department, School of Medical Sciences, College of Health and Allied Sciences, University of Cape Coast, Cape Coast, Ghana.ORCID 0000-0003-4562-9294
Imran Morhason-BelloDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Institute of Advanced Medical Research and Training, College of Medicine, University College Hospital, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0002-7448-4824
Nicolas MedaFaculty of Medicine, Université Joseph Ki-Zerbo, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Olga LompoCentre de Recherche Internationale en Santé, Université de Ouagadougou, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Philippe MayaudClinical Research Department, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5730-947X
Michael PicklesMedical Research Council Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6754-3945
Marc BrissonCentre de recherche du CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada; Département de médecine sociale et préventive, Faculté de médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
Caroline HodginsDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Sinead Delany-MoretlweWits Reproductive Health and HIV Institute, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-0376-1019
Mathieu Maheu-GirouxDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Population and Global Health, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8363-4388

Funding

CIHRMedical Research Council MR/R015600/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has the highest cervical cancer (CC) burden globally-worsened by its HIV epidemics. In 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) introduced a CC elimination strategy with goals for vaccination, screening, and treatment. To benchmark progress, we examined temporal trends in screening coverage, percent screened at least twice by the age of 45, screening coverage among women living with HIV (WLHIV), and pre-cancer treatment coverage in SSA. METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a systematic analysis of cross-sectional population-based surveys. It included 52 surveys from 28 countries (2000 to 2020) with information on CC screening among women aged 25 to 49 years (N = 151,338 women). We estimated lifetime and past 3-year screening coverage by age, year, country, and HIV serostatus using a Bayesian multilevel model. Post-stratification and imputations were done to obtain aggregate national, regional, and SSA-level estimates. To measure re-screening by age 45, a life table model was developed. Finally, self-reported pre-cancer treatment coverage was pooled across surveys using a Bayesian meta-analysis. Overall, an estimated 14% (95% credible intervals [95% CrI]: 11% to 21%) of women aged 30 to 49 years had ever been screened for CC in 2020, with important regional and country-level differences. In Eastern and Western/Central Africa, regional screening coverages remained constant from 2000 to 2020 and WLHIV had greater odds of being screened compared to women without HIV. In Southern Africa, however, screening coverages increased and WLHIV had equal odds of screening. Notably this region was found to have higher screening coverage in comparison to other African regions. Rescreening rates were high among women who have already been screened; however, it was estimated that only 12% (95% CrI: 10% to 18%) of women had been screened twice or more by age 45 in 2020. Finally, treatment coverage among 4 countries with data was 84% (95% CrI: 70% to 95%). Limitations of our analyses include the paucity of data on screening modality and the few countries that had multiple surveys.

conclusionOverall, CC screening coverage remains sub-optimal and did not improve much over the last 2 decades, outside of Southern Africa. Action is needed to increase screening coverage if CC elimination is to be achieved.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAfrica South of the SaharaBayes TheoremCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID36634119
PMCPMC9882915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.