Trial reportJAMA2023
Strategies to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening With Mailed Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Kits: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 33 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.
Self-Testing Options in the Era of Primary HPV Screening for Cervical Cancer: the STEP Trial
Human Papillomavirus Self-Sampling Options to Promote Equity (HOPE)
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Promoting cervical cancer screening via a mailed HPV self-collection kit: Reactions from screeners and non-screeners.Patient education and counseling · 2026Trial
- Cost-Effectiveness of HPV Self-Testing Options for Cervical Cancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- A Mail-Based HPV Self-Collection Program to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening in Appalachia: Results of a Group Randomized Trial.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Trial
- Mapping community-based health promotion strategies for cervical cancer screening uptake: A scoping review of intervention components, delivery models and implementation gaps.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2026Review
- Comparative Analysis of Breast and Cervical Screening Adaptability at a Federally Qualified Health Center.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2026Article
- Acceptability of HPV self-sampling in three urban academic emergency departments.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening With Human Papillomavirus Self-Collection Testing in an Opioid Treatment Program.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Article
- Acceptability and Feasibility of Home-Based Human Papillomavirus Self-Testing as Primary Screening for Cervical Cancer Detection in the State of Alabama.Journal of community health · 2026Article
- HPV genotype distribution and cervical lesions in colposcopy-referred women in Western China: a cross-sectional study.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Perceptions of HPV Self-Collection for Cervical Cancer Screening Among Mobile Health Program Attendees.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Effect of direct mailing self-sampling kits on participation in the Dutch hrHPV-based cervical screening programme: a population-based study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Adherence to Screening for Colorectal, Cervical, and Lung Cancer in a US Consortium.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- HPV Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening in Morocco: A Cross-Sectional Study.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2026Article
- Self-collection for primary HPV screening using dry swabs: a review of clinical performance, laboratory considerations, and patient preferences.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
- Women's Preferences for Home-Based Self-Sampling or Clinic-Based Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Implementation of HPV Self-Sampling in Cervical Cancer Screening Programs: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Output, Global Trends, and Collaboration Networks.BioMed research international · 2026Article
- Adherence to HPV-Based Cervical Cancer Screening: A Concept Analysis for Nursing and Midwifery Practice.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Concordance and acceptability of a novel human papillomavirus self-collection tool for cervical cancer screening in economically developed regions: a prospective cohort study in Shanghai, China.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Sexual assault and cancer pathways: a scoping review of biomedical and screening outcomes.BMC women's health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Optimal strategies for increasing cervical cancer screening may differ by patient screening history and health care setting. Mailing human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling kits to individuals who are overdue for screening increases adherence; however, offering self-sampling kits to screening-adherent individuals has not been evaluated in the US. Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of direct-mail and opt-in approaches for offering HPV self-sampling kits to individuals by cervical cancer screening history (screening-adherent and currently due, overdue, or unknown). Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted in Kaiser Permanente Washington, a US integrated health care delivery system. Individuals aged 30 to 64 years with female sex, a primary care clinician, and no hysterectomy were identified through electronic health records (EHRs) and enrolled between November 20, 2020, and January 28, 2022, with follow-up through July 29, 2022. Interventions: Individuals stratified as due (eg, at the time of randomization, these individuals have been previously screened and are due for their next screening in ≤3 months) were randomized to receive usual care (patient reminders and clinician EHR alerts [n = 3671]), education (usual care plus educational materials about screening [n = 3960]), direct mail (usual care plus educational materials and a mailed self-sampling kit [n = 1482]), or to opt in (usual care plus educational materials and the option to request a kit [n = 3956]). Individuals who were overdue for screening were randomized to receive usual care (n = 5488), education (n = 1408), or direct mail (n = 1415). Individuals with unknown history for screening were randomized to receive usual care (n = 2983), education (n = 3486), or to opt in (n = 3506). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was screening completion within 6 months. Primary analyses compared direct-mail or opt-in participants with individuals randomized to the education group. Results: The intention-to-treat analyses included 31 355 randomized individuals (mean [SD] age, 45.9 [10.4] years). Among those who were due for screening, compared with receiving education alone (1885 [47.6%]), screening completion was 14.1% (95% CI, 11.2%-16.9%) higher in the direct-mail group (914 [61.7%]) and 3.5% (95% CI, 1.2%-5.7%) higher in the opt-in group (2020 [51.1%]). Among individuals who were overdue, screening completion was 16.9% (95% CI, 13.8%-20.0%) higher in the direct-mail group (505 [35.7%]) compared with education alone (264 [18.8%]). Among those with unknown history, screening was 2.2% (95% CI, 0.5%-3.9%) higher in the opt-in group (634 [18.1%]) compared with education alone (555 [15.9%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Within a US health care system, direct-mail self-sampling increased cervical cancer screening by more than 14% in individuals who were due or overdue for cervical cancer screening. The opt-in approach minimally increased screening. To increase screening adherence, systems implementing HPV self-sampling should prioritize direct-mail outreach for individuals who are due or overdue for screening. For individuals with unknown screening history, testing alternative outreach approaches and additional efforts to document screening history are warranted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04679675.
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.