ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Opportunistic offering of self-sampling to non-attenders within the English cervical screening programme: a pragmatic, multicentre, implementation feasibility trial with randomly allocated cluster intervention start dates (YouScreen).
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Identifying optimum implementation for human papillomavirus self-sampling in underserved communities: A systematic review.Journal of medical screening · 2025Pooled it
- Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Screening With Universal Access to Vaginal Self-Testing: Outcomes of an Implementation Trial.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Trial
- '…but look how many lives would have been saved if this was available then' Exploring the acceptability of future Human Papillomavirus self-sampling, and the barriers and facilitators of cervical cancer screening for those with intellectual disabilities in Scotland.British journal of health psychology · 2026Article
- Comparison of Cervical Screening at 6- and 12-Weeks Postnatal: A Paired-Sample Feasibility Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
- Biology-aligned cervical cancer screening: target-centric biomarkers and next-generation diagnostic platforms.Biomarker research · 2026Review
- A global scoping review of interventions to increase participation in screening programmes for breast, cervical and colorectal cancer between 2016 and 2025.BMC public health · 2026Article
- The role of the health belief model and HPV self-testing in cervical cancer screening participation in the Czech Republic.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Clinician and patient experiences with opportunistic offer of HPV self-testing in Aotearoa New Zealand primary care clinics: interview and survey findings.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Investigating the acceptability of cervical screening, using conventional clinician-taken cervical samples or urine self-sampling, at 6 weeks postnatal: A cross-sectional questionnaire.Journal of medical screening · 2026Article
- A guide to cancer screening.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- How would Australian women and people with a cervix like to access self-collection for cervical screening? Screening preferences from a national survey.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- Evidence from Europe on implementation, participation and performance of self-collection for cervical cancer screening.Future oncology (London, England) · 2026Review
- Cost and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer HPV DNA self-sampling: a systematic review.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Understanding knowledge, beliefs, values and barriers towards cervical cancer screening and self-sampling amongst migrant Muslim women in Southwest London: an in-depth qualitative interview study.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Real-Life Experience with HPV Self-Sampling Among Turkish Women: Acceptability and Future Screening Preferences in a Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Modelling the time to cervical cancer elimination in England: strategies for achieving elimination by 2040.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- High-risk human papillomavirus prevalence and factors associated with testing positive in women living in Montserrat.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Opportunistic offer of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-testing in ethnically diverse primary care clinics in Aotearoa New Zealand: an implementation study.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- HPValidate-human papillomavirus testing with DNA and mRNA assays on self-collected samples in cervical screening: comparison of test characteristics on three self-sampling devices.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Impact of mode of offer of self-sampling to people overdue cervical screening on screening participation: a randomised controlled trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Self-sampling has game-changing potential to tackle the declining participation and inequities seen in many organised cervical screening programmes. Wide variation in uptake between settings and mode of kit offer highlight the importance of local piloting. Furthermore, harnessing the benefits of self-sampling in real-world settings has been surprisingly challenging. The YouScreen study estimated the impact of offering self-sampling to non-attenders within the English Programme and evaluated large-scale opportunistic offering of self-sampling in primary care. Methods: A pragmatic modified stepped-wedge implementation feasibility trial with randomly-allocated cluster intervention start dates at primary care practices in England (133 participating, 62 non-participating). Eligible women were aged 25-64 years and ≥6 months overdue for screening ("non-attenders"). Between January 13, 2021 and 30 November, 2021 self-sampling kits were distributed to non-attenders via an opportunistic offer in primary care when they consulted for any reason and direct mailout to those unscreened 15-months after routine invitation. Primary outcomes were the proportion of non-attenders screened each month; change in coverage; and uptake (90 days). YouScreen is registered with ISRCTN:12759467. Findings: 8338 women provided self-samples following recruitment between January 13, 2021 and 30 November, 2021. Self-samples were returned from 65.5% (6061/9248) who accepted an opportunistically offered kit and 12.9% (2777/17,604) directly-mailed kits. Responders were representative of the ethnically diverse and deprived underlying non-attendee population (64% ethnic minority groups, 60% from the two most deprived national quintiles). The self-sampling intervention resulted in a 22% (95% CI 18-26) increase in non-attenders screened per month (per-protocol analysis) and 12% (95% CI 9-15) (intention-to-treat analysis). Change in coverage at participating (mean intervention duration 7.5 months) vs non-participating practices was 1.6% (95% CI 0.4-2.8). Adverse effects were not formally collected. Interpretation: Opportunistically offering self-sampling to under-screened women in primary care could increase coverage in England and potentially reach underserved populations. Funding: North Central London and North East London Cancer Alliance.
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.