Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40878773›Full record

ReviewCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2025

Contemporary Status and Frontiers of Cervical Cancer Screening in the United States.

Abbigael V Eli, Benjamin B Kasten, Christopher M Mayer, Rishab Samant, Yolanda E Hartman, Isha Chaudhary, Noorullah Imran, Valeria L Dal Zotto, Andrea G Kahn, Rebecca C Arend and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 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

11 authors.

Abbigael V EliDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0001-9014-2659
Benjamin B KastenDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0001-9918-0379
Christopher M MayerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0002-5674-2850
Rishab SamantUndergraduate Cancer Biology Program, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0009-0003-5246-3170
Yolanda E HartmanDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0009-0005-0948-6101
Isha ChaudharyHeersink School of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0009-0008-3207-1459
Noorullah ImranUndergraduate Biomedical Engineering Program, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0009-0003-5352-8845
Valeria L Dal ZottoDepartment of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0002-6690-4788
Andrea G KahnDepartment of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0003-3905-0390
Rebecca C ArendDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0003-2108-3426
Jason M WarramDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.ORCID 0000-0001-5230-0011

Funding

A Topical Plasmid-based Approach to Cervical Cancer ScreeningR21CA283638 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI WARRAM, JASON MORGAN · 2024 to 2025
$376k
NCI NIH HHS R21 CA283638
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cervical cancer screening and its implementation have evolved tremendously since the first method, cytology using the Papanicolaou stain, was introduced in the 1950s. New screening methods, such as human papillomavirus testing, have been discovered, and evidence-based changes have been made to official screening guidelines set forth by various US organizations. With the advent of a human papillomavirus vaccine in 2006 and with more recent research into populations carrying disparate burdens of cervical disease, the effectiveness of current cervical cancer screening programs is being called into question as the disease incidence has not decreased as expected in the past 20 years. This review highlights where cervical cancer screening in the United States started, the current clinical methods, and promising developments on the frontiers of screening research to introduce new screening options or improve current screening programs and outcomes. We also highlight certain population factors that hinder effective screening in high-risk groups, based on research aimed at ensuring that population-wide screening continues to be an effective strategy for reducing cervical cancer incidence and mortality.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerMass ScreeningUterine Cervical NeoplasmsFemaleHumansIncidencePapanicolaou TestPapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesUnited StatesVaginal SmearsPapillomavirus Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID40878773
PMCPMC12580827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.