ReviewCancers2024
The Impact of Urine-Sample HPV Testing on the Effectiveness of Screening for Cervical Cancer: An Umbrella Review.
Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Urine sample for HPV detection in men: is it a valid and non-invasive diagnostic alternative?Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Agreement and Diagnostic Performance of Urinary HPV Testing Versus Clinician-Collected Cervico-Vaginal Sampling: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study in a Romanian Cohort.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Performance of a novel, urine-based test for the detection of cervical human papillomavirus infection.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- HPV detection in first void urine and cervicovaginal samples: comparative study and analysis of associated factors in women from tunja, colombia.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- A United States study of self-collected urine vs clinician-collected cervical sample for HPV and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade two or worse detection: Cross-sectional agreement and diagnostic accuracy study.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of urine-sample HPV (human papillomavirus) testing on the effectiveness of screening for cervical cancer.
methodsThe analysis was based on the results of a systematic review. Secondary studies were searched in the following medical databases: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The results of the statistical tests presented in the article originate from research conducted by the authors of the included articles.
resultsFrom a total of 1869 citations, 5 studies were included in this review. Sensitivity and specificity for the detection of any HPV from first-void urine samples were 87% [95% CI: (0.74; 0.94)] and 89% [95% CI: (0.81; 0.93)], respectively. Moreover, participants in the analyzed studies had indicated that they felt comfortable with urine testing.
conclusionsThe development of methods to detect HPV infection in first-void urine samples and the application of this sampling method in widely available screening tests could significantly increase patients' willingness to participate in testing.
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.