ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2023
High risk HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in a Puerto Rican population.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) causes cervical cancer, the fourth most common cause of death in women in the United States (US). Several major screening clinical trials have demonstrated that high risk HPV (HR-HPV) DNA primary screen is more sensitive at determining the risk of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia level 3 or higher (CIN ≥ 3) than cytology alone and is similar to co-testing. In this cross-sectional study, we characterized a Hispanic population of 18,052 women ages 21-70 years with HR-HPV DNA testing and cytology to determine the prevalence of HR-HPV in the population and determine the likelihood of high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL). We also compared cytology, HR-HPV DNA testing, and co-testing strategies to determine sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for HSIL in cervical biopsies. Results show that HR-HPV had a slightly higher sensitivity (94.2% vs 92.3%) compared to cytology for all high-grade disease (CIN2/3).
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.