ReviewFuture oncology (London, England)2026
Evidence from Europe on implementation, participation and performance of self-collection for cervical cancer screening.
Review in Future oncology (London, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What are the views and experiences of human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling for cervical screening in high-income countries? A qualitative systematic review using the Theoretical Domains Framework.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Introducing self-sampling for cervical cancer screening: A regional implementation study in Pirkanmaa, Finland.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Trial
- Effect of Self-Sampling HPV DNA Testing on Cervical Cancer Screening in Singapore's Primary Care: Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.Annals of family medicine · 2026Trial
- Comparison of three different hpv self-sampling tools - a subanalysis of the prospective, randomized hannover self-collection study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Trial
- Effect of direct mailing self-sampling kits on participation in the Dutch hrHPV-based cervical screening programme: a population-based study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Observational
- Opportunistic and Organized Cervical Cancer Screening: Impact on Lesion Severity and Surgical Outcomes in 9830 Cervical Conizations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Self-collection for primary HPV screening using dry swabs: a review of clinical performance, laboratory considerations, and patient preferences.Journal of clinical microbiology · 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
- Barriers and enablers for health system reform.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Factors associated with uptake of gynaecological care and cervical cancer screening among women in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study.HIV medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cervical cancer screening programs reduce the number of cervical cancer cases and deaths, but the success of any screening program is dependent on high participant uptake and coverage and many European countries are observing declining cervical cancer screening coverage to below national targets. Self-collection of vaginal samples for human papillomavirus testing, also termed self-sampling, is one strategy which is being introduced to try to increase screening coverage by removing barriers to participation and it has attracted growing interest and support globally. Informed by peer-reviewed and gray literature, this narrative review starts with a case study from the Netherlands and outlines the self-collection landscape in Europe within the themes of program implementation and relative test performance. It highlights some of the current evidence gaps needed to inform policy decisions on the use of self-collection within screening programs.
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.