ArticleScientific reports2025
Accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling HPV testing in cervical cancer screening: a population-based study in rural Yunnan, China.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-collected cervical samples for detection of high-risk human papillomavirus: A community outreach approach in a remote region.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Demographic and Screening-to-Diagnosis Cascade Indicators for Risk Stratification in an Organized Cervical Cancer Screening Program: Evidence from 82,141 Women in Yunnan, China.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Clinical performance of triage strategies for HPV-positive women in cervical cancer screening in rural Yunnan China.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Cervical Cancer in the Era of HPV: Translating Molecular Mechanisms into Preventive Public Health Action.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Perceived Feasibility and Acceptability of a Self-Collected HPV DNA Testing Policy for Cervical Cancer Screening in Thailand.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the accuracy and acceptability of self-sampling samples for HPV testing for cervical cancer screening in rural Yunnan of China. In 2022, 3000 women aged 17-69 were recruited and provided self-sampling vaginal samples alongside provider-sampling samples for HPV DNA and E6/E7 mRNA testing, as well as artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted cytology. Women who tested positive for any high-risk HPV DNA or mRNA, or who displayed cytology abnormalities, were recalled for a colposcopy examination and biopsied when necessary. The accuracy of these tests in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse (CIN2 +) and CIN3 + was evaluated. The sensitivity of the HPV DNA test for self-sampling was 96.2%, compared to 92.3% for provider-sampling, 73.1% for the mRNA test, and 53.9% for AI-assisted cytology in detecting CIN2 + . The specificity was 83.9% for self-sampling HPV DNA test, 86.4% for provider-sampling HPV DNA test, 91.4% for the mRNA test, and 94.2% for AI-assisted cytology. The area under the curve (AUC) values for these screening methods were 0.90, 0.90, 0.82, and 0.74, respectively. Only 37% of participants preferred the self-sampling model, with lower preference observed among older women, those from rare minority groups, those with lower education levels, and who displayed limited knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding cervical cancer screening. Self-sampling HPV DNA testing demonstrated comparable clinical accuracy to provider-sampling test and were more accurate than that of mRNA test and AI-assisted cytology. Self-sampling HPV testing offers a promising screening strategy in rural Yunnan China. Applicable health education is urgently needed to improve the acceptability of 'self-sampling' model among the target population.
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.