Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40578907›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM2025

The Impact of COVID-19 on Cervical Cancer Screening in Primary Care.

Omer Atac, Lars E Peterson, Teresa M Waters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Women's Health Care, Prevention in Practice, and Common Medical Illnesses.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM
    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

3 authors.

Omer AtacFrom the Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY (OA); Public Health, International School of Medicine, Istanbul Medipol University, Turkiye (OA); American Board of Family Medicine, Lexington, KY (LEP); Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY (LEP); School of Public Health, Augusta University, Augusta, GA (TMW). omer.atac@uky.edu).
Lars E PetersonFrom the Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY (OA); Public Health, International School of Medicine, Istanbul Medipol University, Turkiye (OA); American Board of Family Medicine, Lexington, KY (LEP); Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY (LEP); School of Public Health, Augusta University, Augusta, GA (TMW).
Teresa M WatersFrom the Health Management and Policy, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY (OA); Public Health, International School of Medicine, Istanbul Medipol University, Turkiye (OA); American Board of Family Medicine, Lexington, KY (LEP); Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY (LEP); School of Public Health, Augusta University, Augusta, GA (TMW).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe COVID-19 pandemic has reduced the number of elective in-person visits to primary care practices. This study examined how the pandemic may have affected cervical cancer (CC) screening rates in primary care settings across the United States.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study using data from the PRIME Registry of the American Board of Family Medicine from March 15, 2017, to March 14, 2022. We included 2,207,355 women aged 21 to 65 years who had visited a clinician (n = 1,052) from any of 472 primary care practices. We compared CC screening rates among eligible women during in-person visits over the 3 prepandemic years with those during the 2 years of the pandemic.

resultsScreening rates (per 100 eligible patients with in-person visits) decreased from 1.85 to 1.12 in the first quarter of the first year and remained lower throughout both years of the pandemic compared with prepandemic year, had not returned to prepandemic levels by the end of the second year. Hispanic or Latino (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96) and Black or African American (OR = 1.37) women were more likely to be screened, whereas those receiving care from male clinicians (OR = 0.34) were less likely to be screened.

conclusionsCC screening rates remained below prepandemic levels throughout the 2 years of the pandemic. Policy makers and health care professionals should strategize approaches to enhance CC screening rates, including the exploration of alternative methods, such as home-based CC screening. New screening approaches are needed to ensure preparedness for future health crises.

Indexed as

COVID-19Early Detection of CancerPrimary Health CareUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2United StatesYoung AdultCervical CancerCOVID-19Cross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerLong-Term EffectsPandemicsPreventive CarePrimary Health CareRetrospective StudiesScreening

Identifiers

PMID40578907
PMCPMC12616823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.