Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40160269›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in microbiology2025

Human papillomavirus self-sampling in Asia: a systematic review.

Xuechao Ji, Menglin Hao, Yixiao Wang, Wenzhi Kong, Zangyu Pan, Qi Sun, Jinwei Miao

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. HPV Self-Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening in Morocco: A Cross-Sectional Study.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2026
    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

7 authors.

Xuechao JiDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Menglin HaoDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yixiao WangDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Wenzhi KongDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Zangyu PanDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Qi SunDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Jinwei MiaoDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling may be an accurate and effective alternative sampling method to conventional cervical cancer screening methods. This systematic review compares the accuracy and acceptance of self-sampling to clinician sampling for HPV testing in Asia. Methods: The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, and Web of Science databases were searched for publications published from the establishment of the database to 2023. The risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool for studies included in this review. All studies evaluating the accuracy and acceptance of HPV self-sampling, and agreement of self- and clinician-collected samples in Asia were included. The accuracy of each study was demonstrated through the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or cancer, as well as the detection rate of HPV. The agreement between the two sampling methods was assessed based on the detection outcomes of HPV. Acceptance was indicated by women's preferences for HPV self-sampling. Results: Sixty-seven studies including 117,279 adult, female participants were included in this review. The type of HPV screening, other intervention components, study design, sample size, follow-up period, analysis method, numerical outcomes, results, and limitations were extracted from each study. The sensitivity and specificity of HPV self-sampling in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia were higher than 80% and 70%, consistent with the results of HPV clinician sampling. The consistency between self-sampling and clinician-sampling was high in most studies, and the kappa value was more than 0.7. Women had high acceptance of self-sampling but expressed some concerns. Conclusion: Self-sampling for HPV testing can significantly improve cervical cancer screening coverage, especially in areas with limited medical resources or reluctance to accept physician sampling. In most studies, the accuracy and acceptance of HPV self-sampling was comparable to clinician sampling. However, the diagnostic criteria and HPV detection methods still need to be adjusted due to the low sensitivity of HPV self-sampling in some studies in China and India. Targeted health education should be carried out to improve the acceptance of HPV self-sampling in women. Systematic review registration: https://inplasy.com/?s=INPLASY202520107, INPLASY202520107.

Indexed as

Asiacervical cancerclinician samplinghuman papillomavirusscreeningself-sampling

Identifiers

PMID40160269
PMCPMC11949917

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.