Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37808258›Full record

ArticleGeburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde2023

Evaluations of the 2019 Annual Statistics Under the Cervical Cytology Quality Assurance Agreement: 2019 Annual Statistics for Cervical Cytology from 15608413 Women.

Ulrich Schenck, Heike Hantschke-Zerbich, Frank Woellner, Frank Michel

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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.

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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cytopathology Terminology Systems: European Federation of Cytological Societies Survey on Practice in Europe.Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ulrich SchenckInstitut für Allgemeine Pathologie und Pathologische Anatomie, Technische Universität München, München, Germany.
Heike Hantschke-ZerbichDezernat Versorgungsqualität, Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung KdöR, Berlin, Germany.
Frank WoellnerDezernat Versorgungsqualität, Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung KdöR, Berlin, Germany.
Frank MichelDezernat Versorgungsqualität, Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung KdöR, Berlin, Germany.
National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians · DETechnical University of Munich · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cervical cancer screening, which was introduced into the programme of medical care covered by statutory health insurance in Germany in 1971 and has since been constantly updated through quality assurance measures, was fundamentally revised and developed in 2008 through the Cervical Cytology Quality Assurance Agreement pursuant to Section 135(2) of the German Social Code Book V [SGB V]. Since 2015 it has been mandatory for cytology facilities to record annual statistics based on the Munich Nomenclature III. The aim of this article is to present the results of the annual statistics for 2019, which was the last year before the introduction of the cervical cancer screening programme in accordance with the Federal Joint Committee's guideline on organised cancer screening programmes 1 . Materials and Methods: The annual statistics of the laboratories, including histology analyses performed up until 30 June the following year, are reported to the Regional Associations of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians. The laboratories receive benchmark reports from their Regional Associations of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, and these statistics are transmitted anonymously to the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (KBV). Results: In 2019, 17609082 smears from 15608413 women were examined in Germany. Of these smears, 97.49% were normal and 2.51% showed atypical or suspicious changes, consisting mostly of minor squamous epithelial changes in groups II-p (0.81%) and IIID1 (0.735%).Histology specimens are available for "Dysplasia findings with higher probability of regression" in group IIID1 (4.89% of initial IIID1 cytology findings), group IIID2 (18.60%), "unclear or doubtful findings" in group III-p to x (20.7%), and "immediate precursors to cervical carcinoma" in group IV (83.1%) and group V (77.19%).In the cytology findings for group IVa-p, which corresponds to CIN 3 target lesions, the cytology correlated with the histology finding in 80.48% of cases.Lesions found in 2019: 23463 CIN 3 lesions, 668 adenocarcinomas in situ, 3891 malignant tumours, including 2342 cervical carcinomas of which 1743 were squamous cell carcinomas and 599 were cervical adenocarcinomas (25.57%); 1549 endometrial carcinomas and other malignancies. Inference/Conclusion: The data demonstrate the good practicability of cervical cancer screening in 2019. Higher grade lesions were reliably clarified histologically.

Indexed as

cervical cancercervixcytologyepidemiologyprecancerous cervical lesionsquality assurance

Identifiers

PMID37808258
PMCPMC10556867
OpenAlexW4386946703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.