Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37280031›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Two self-sampling strategies for HPV primary cervical cancer screening compared with clinician-collected sampling: an economic evaluation.

Susie Huntington, Krishnan Puri Sudhir, Verena Schneider, Alex Sargent, Katy Turner, Emma J Crosbie, Elisabeth J Adams

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07214506 (Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Options to Promote Equity), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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.

NCT07214506 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Options to Promote Equity (HOPE)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ArizonaRan2026 to 2027Enrolled100ConditionsUterine Cervical Neoplasms, HPV Testing, Pap SmearArmsHuman papillomavirus Self-collection, Usual Care
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Urine human papillomavirus testing for cervical screening in a UK general screening population: a diagnostic test accuracy study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  7. Acceptability of Self-Sampling for Cervical Screening in Ethnically Diverse Groups in Northwest England: A Focus Group Study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Blood self-sampling: friend or foe?Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A review of urinary HPV testing for cervical cancer management and HPV vaccine surveillance: rationale, strategies, and limitations.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Susie HuntingtonAquarius Population Health, London, UK susie.huntington@aquariusph.com.ORCID 0000-0002-2854-7441
Krishnan Puri SudhirAquarius Population Health, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7787-0333
Verena SchneiderAquarius Population Health, London, UK.
Alex SargentCytology Department, Clinical Sciences Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Katy TurnerAquarius Population Health, London, UK.
Emma J CrosbieDivision of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0284-8630
Elisabeth J AdamsAquarius Population Health, London, UK.
Aquarius Population Health · GBManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBManchester University NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the costs and effects of three sampling strategies for human papillomavirus (HPV) primary screening.

designCost-consequence analysis from a health system perspective using a deterministic decision tree model.

settingEngland.

participantsA cohort of 10 000 women aged 25-65 years eligible for the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme (NHSCSP).

methodsThe model was based on the NHSCSP HPV primary screening pathway and adapted for self-sampling. It used a 3-year cycle: routine screening (year 1) and recall screening (years 2/3). Parameter inputs were informed using published studies, NHSCSP reports and input from experts and manufacturers. Costs were from 2020/2021, British pound sterling (£).

interventionsThree sampling strategies were implemented: (1) routine clinician-collected cervical sample, (2) self-collected first-void (FV) urine, (3) self-collected vaginal swab. The hypothetical self-sampling strategies involved mailing women a sampling kit.

main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes: overall costs (for all screening steps to colposcopy), number of complete screens and cost per complete screen. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: number of women screened, number of women lost to follow-up, cost per colposcopy and total screening costs for a plausible range of uptake scenarios.

resultsIn the base case, the average cost per complete screen was £56.81 for clinician-collected cervical sampling, £38.57 for FV urine self-sampling and £40.37 for vaginal self-sampling. In deterministic sensitivity analysis, the variables most affecting the average cost per screen were the cost of sample collection for clinician-collected sampling and the cost of laboratory HPV testing for the self-sampling strategies. Scaled to consider routine screening in England, if uptake in non-attenders increased by 15% and 50% of current screeners converted to self-sampling, the NHSCSP would save £19.2 million (FV urine) or £16.5 million (vaginal) per year.

conclusionSelf-sampling could provide a less costly alternative to clinician-collected sampling for routine HPV primary screening and offers opportunities to expand the reach of cervical screening to under-screened women.

Indexed as

Papillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMass ScreeningPapillomaviridaeState MedicineVaginal Smearshealth economicshealth policyoncology

Identifiers

PMID37280031
PMCPMC10254906
OpenAlexW4379600301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.