Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40874108›Full record

ArticleCanadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique2025

Exploring the role of the oncology nurse in cervical cancer screening programs during times of transition.

Alessia Lamanna, Sophie Gosselin, Catriona Buick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Alessia Lamannastudent, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto ON; York University, Faculty of Health, School of Nursing, Toronto, ON.
Sophie GosselinOdette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON.
Catriona BuickOdette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto ON; York University, Faculty of Health, School of Nursing, Toronto, ON.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cervical cancer remains the fourth most prevalent cancer among women worldwide, with approximately 660,000 new diagnoses and 350,000 deaths recorded in 2022. Countries with well-established preventative measures have experienced significant reductions in cervical cancer rates through vaccination and regular screening. In Canada, recent efforts have emphasized the adoption of primary HPV-DNA testing as a primary screening tool in cervical cancer screening programs, replacing the cytology (pap) testing. The COVID-19 pandemic had disrupted these initiatives, posing challenges to screening and vaccination programs. Despite these setbacks, ongoing recovery strategies are underway to mitigate the pandemic's adverse effects. Several challenges regarding this shift also have been identified by countries that have transitioned their respective screening programs to primary HPV-DNA testing. Understanding these unique challenges will be essential for developing strategies to address barriers, such as implementing new technologies, training healthcare providers, and ensuring equitable access to screening. This review seeks to (1) examine the evolution of HPV testing and the transition from cervical cytology (Pap smear) to HPV testing as the primary screening method; (2) assess the long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on screening, prevention, and HPV vaccination within the Canadian healthcare system; and (3) explore the pivotal role of oncology nurses in advancing education, advocacy, and leadership in cancer prevention.

Identifiers

PMID40874108
PMCPMC12379916

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.