ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2023
Abnormal Pap smear among pregnant women - Feasibility of opportunistic cervical screening.
Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2023. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Approaches to Intraepithelial Cervical Neoplasia Management in Pregnancy: A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Prevalence of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in Mexican women aged under 40 years: a cross-sectional study.Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association · 2025Article
- Pregnancy-Related Precancerous Cervical Lesions: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, Evolution, and Impact upon Gestation and Fertility.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The uptake of cervical cancer screening is poor, especially in developing countries. Thus, pregnancy represents a good opportunity to have the test done. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence of abnormal Pap smear among pregnant women during their antenatal check-ups. Study design: A prospective study involving five hundred and ninety-six women was recruited over a 1-year duration from 15th January 2018 until 14th January 2019 in a tertiary referral center, in Malaysia. Pap smears were performed on all consented pregnant women using liquid-based cytology and the results were obtained to evaluate the prevalence of abnormal Pap smear during pregnancy. Maternal risk factors associated with abnormal Pap smear were identified and the outcomes of abnormal Pap smear were followed up. Results: A total of 670 participants were approached and 596 participants agreed to participate, giving a response rate of 89.0 %. Therefore, 587 participants were available for analysis. There were nine unsatisfactory smears (1.5 %). The prevalence of premalignant lesions reported on p % ap smear was 0.8 %. Three respondents had atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) (0.5 %) and two respondents had low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) (0.3 %). Almost one-third (30.3 %) of respondents had an infection and 24 (4.1 %) smears were reported as reactive changes associated with inflammation. Respondents between the age of 20-30 years old had a significant association with an abnormal pre-cancerous smear (p = 0.000) as well as nulliparity (p = 0.0.40). There was no significant association between height, weight, BMI, sexual partner, age of first intercourse, smoking habit, history of sexually transmitted disease and history of abnormal Pap smear. Conclusion: The prevalence of abnormal pre-cancerous smears during pregnancy is low. However, it is desirable to perform cervical screening as it provides an opportunity to no screening at all.
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.