Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38381754›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2024

Interventions to increase follow-up of abnormal cervical cancer screening results: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

Melissa Lopez Varon, Yimin Geng, Bryan M Fellman, Catherine Troisi, Maria E Fernandez, Ruosha Li, Belinda Reininger, Kathleen M Schmeler, Emma Allanson

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Melissa Lopez VaronGynecologic Oncology & Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8960-8017
Yimin GengResearch Medical Library, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America.
Bryan M FellmanBiostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America.
Catherine TroisiManagement, Policy & Community Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, United States of America.
Maria E FernandezHealth Promotion & Behavioral Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, United States of America.
Ruosha LiBiostatistics, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Houston, Texas, United States of America.
Belinda ReiningerHealth Promotion & Behavioral Sciences, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health, Brownsville Regional Campus, Brownsville, Texas, United States of America.
Kathleen M SchmelerGynecologic Oncology & Reproductive Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9670-4189
Emma AllansonThe Division of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USThe University of Western Australia · AU

Funding

NIH HHS CA016672
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEnsuring timely follow-up of abnormal screening results is essential for eliminating cervical cancer.

objectiveThe purpose of the study was to review single and multicomponent interventions designed to improve follow-up of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening results. We report on effectiveness across studies, and describe what aspects of these interventions might be more impactful.

methodsPublications were searched between January 2000 and December 2022. The search included observational, quasi-experimental (pre-post studies) and randomized controlled studies describing at least one intervention to increase follow-up of women with abnormal cervical cancer screening results. Outcomes of studies included completion of any follow-up (i.e., attending a follow-up appointment), timely diagnosis (i.e., colposcopy results within 90 days of screening) and time to diagnostic resolution (i.e., days between screening and final diagnosis). We assessed risk of bias for observational and quasi-experimental studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) tool and the Cochrane collaboration tool for randomized studies. We conducted a meta-analysis using studies where data were provided to estimate a summary average effect of the interventions on follow-up of patients and to identify characteristics of studies associated with an increased effectiveness of interventions. We extracted the comparison and intervention proportions of women with follow-up before and after the intervention (control and intervention) and plotted the odds ratios (ORs) of completing follow-up along with the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using forest plots for the interventions vs. controls when data were available.

findingsFrom 7,457 identified studies, 28 met the inclusion criteria. Eleven (39%) of the included studies had used a randomized design. Most studies (63%) assessed completion of any follow-up visit as the primary outcome, whereas others measured time to definite diagnosis (15%) or diagnostic resolution (22%). Navigation was used as a type of intervention in 63% of the included studies. Most interventions utilized behavioral approaches to improve outcomes. The overall estimate of the OR for completion of follow-up for all interventions was 1.81 (1.36-2.42). The highest impact was for programs using more than one approach (multicomponent interventions) to improve outcomes with OR = 3.01 (2.03-4.46), compared with studies with single intervention approaches with OR = 1.56 (1.14-2.14). No statistical risks were noted from publication bias or small-study effects in the studies reviewed.

conclusionOur findings revealed large heterogeneity in how follow-up of abnormal cervical cancer screening results was defined. Our results suggest that multicomponent interventions were more effective than single component interventions and should be used to improve follow-up after abnormal cervical cancer screening results. Navigation appears to be an important tool for improving follow-up. We also provide recommendations for future studies and implications for policy in terms of better defining outcomes for these interventions.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerUterine Cervical NeoplasmsColposcopyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMass Screening

Identifiers

PMID38381754
PMCPMC10880967
OpenAlexW4391993764

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.