ArticleRevista de saude publica2023
Papanicolaou test in Brazil: analysis of the National Health Survey of 2013 and 2019.
Article in Revista de saude publica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the burden of HPV-associated cancers in Brazil: Hospitalization and mortality trends from 2011 to 2019.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Interval between diagnosis and treatment of cervical cancer in Brazil: comparative analysis of cases with and without diagnosis prior to arrival at the hospital unit.BMC women's health · 2025Article
- Prevalence and social inequalities in the use of cancer screening tests in Campinas, Brazil (ISACamp 2014/15).Revista brasileira de epidemiologia = Brazilian journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- [Cervical cancer screening in Brazil: a coverage analysis using the Brazilian Cancer Information System].Cadernos de saude publica · 2025Article
- Factors associated with advanced diagnosis of cervical cancer: a hospital-based retrospective study in a state of the Brazilian Legal Amazon.Ecancermedicalscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the coverage of cervical cancer screening in Brazil in 2013 and 2019, investigating the factors associated with having the test performed and the reasons given for not doing it. Additionally, a comparison is made concerning the time taken to receive the test result in SUS (Sistema Único de Saúde) and in the private health services.
methodsUsing data from the National Health Survey (Pesquisa Nacional de Saúde - PNS), prevalence rates and corresponding confidence intervals were calculated to determine the frequency of recent cervical cancer screenings among women aged between 25 and 64 years old in Brazil, for both 2013 and 2019. Poisson regression models were employed to compare the prevalence of the outcome according to sociodemographic characteristics. The reasons for not having the test and the time between performing and receiving the result were also analyzed.
resultsThe findings revealed an increase in the coverage of preventive cervical cancer exams in Brazil from 78.7% in 2013 to 81.3% in 2019. Additionally, there was a decline in the proportion of women who had never undergone the exam, from 9.7% to 6.1%. Prevalence of test uptake was higher among white women, those with higher levels of education and income, and those residing in the South and Southeast regions of the country. The most commonly cited reasons for not taking the test were the impression it was unnecessary (45% in both 2013 and 2019) and never having been asked to undergo the test (20.6% in 2013 and 14.8% in 2019).
conclusionsDespite the high coverage of screening achieved in the country, there is great inequality in access to the test, and a non-negligible number of women are at greater risk of dying from a preventable disease. Efforts must be made to structure an organized screening program that identifies and captures the most vulnerable women.
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.