Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38131106›Full record

ArticleJournal of primary care & community health

A Scoping Literature Review on Evidence-Based Strategies to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening.

Kathryn J Bonuck, Heather Angier, Sara McCrimmon, Heather Holderness, Jeremy Erroba, Nathalie Huguet, Jennifer E DeVoe, Patricia A Carney

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Kathryn J BonuckOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0497-8140
Heather AngierFred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, USA.
Sara McCrimmonOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5286-5864
Heather HoldernessOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3915-8510
Jeremy ErrobaOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Nathalie HuguetOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4064-1553
Jennifer E DeVoeOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Patricia A CarneyOregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2937-655X

Funding

Research ProgramP50CA244289 · NCI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI DEVOE, JENNIFER E, HUGUET, NATHALIE · 2019 to 2023
$7.6M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA244289
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous reviews of strategies to increase cervical cancer screening are more than 10 years old, the U.S. continues to fall short of the Healthy People 2030 cervical cancer screening goal, and guidelines were revised in 2018, therefore an updated review of the existing literature is needed. We conducted a scoping review using electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Ovid Medline that included publication dates between 2012 and 2021 to answer the question, "Which strategies implemented in U.S. primary care settings have been most successful in increasing rates of cervical cancer screening since the 2012 US Preventative Services Task Force cervical cancer screening guidelines were published?" We mapped findings to pre-specified implementation strategy categories. After initially identifying 399 articles, we excluded 350 due to duplicates or not meeting review criteria, leaving 49 articles for full review. We excluded 37 of these during full-text review and identified 2 additional articles from the manual search of reference lists for a total of 14 studies for abstraction. Eleven articles reported on strategies resulting in increased cervical cancer screening, and 3 did not. Clinic workflow re-design strategies showed the greatest promise in improving cervical cancer screening rates, education strategies for patients had mixed results, and quality management strategies were not effective. These findings suggest clinical workflow re-structures and patient education strategies can increase cervical cancer screening in primary care settings. Results are particularly important in settings that care for underserved populations, as these settings may need additional implementation strategies to decrease cervical cancer screening disparities.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerUterine Cervical NeoplasmsChildFemaleHealth StatusHumanscervical cancer screeningimplementation strategiespreventionscoping reviewunderserved communities

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.