ReviewCureus2024
Evolution of Pathological Techniques for the Screening of Cervical Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing Cervical Cancer Prevention Equity: Innovations in Self-Sampling and Digital Health Technologies Across Healthcare Settings.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evolutionary journey of cervical cancer screening has been a major medical success story, considering the substantial role it has played in dwindling the disease burden. Through sustained collaborative efforts within the medical community, significant advances have been made from the humble yet path-breaking conventional Pap smear to the current automated screening systems and human papillomavirus (HPV) molecular testing. With the integration of artificial intelligence into screening techniques, we are currently at the precipice of circumventing the pitfalls of manual cytology readings and improving the efficiency of the screening systems by a significant margin. Despite the technological milestones traversed, the high logistics and operational cost, besides the technical know-how of operating the automated systems, can pose a major practical challenge in the widespread adoption of these advanced techniques in cervical cancer screening programs. This would suggest the need to adopt strategies that are tailored to the demands and needs of the different settings keeping their limitations in mind. This review aims to take the reader through the entire evolutionary journey of cervical cancer screening programs, highlight the individual merits and demerits of each technique, and discuss the recommendations from the major global guidelines.
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.