ArticleCureus2025
Comparison of Self-Collected Versus Clinician-Collected Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Sampling for Cervical Cancer Screening: A Pilot Study in the United Arab Emirates.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer deaths in women in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), with most deaths attributed to late detection. Most of the cervical cancer cases are linked to infection with sexually transmitted 'high-risk' types of human papillomavirus (HPV). Numerous studies have established the superiority of HPV detection in cervical samples compared to cervical cytology for the primary screening of cervical cancer. Self-collection of samples is found to be very acceptable and favored by the majority of women globally, making it a prospective way to increase women's participation in routine cervical cancer screening.
aimsThis study was done to compare the results of self-collected HPV samples versus clinician-collected samples by using the same device (Qvintip, Aprovix, Stockholm, Sweden). Also, to find out the patient-reported acceptability and preference for the sampling technique, a feedback form was used. METHODS AND MATERIALS: One hundred eligible women were selected at random (convenience sampling) during their visit to the Gynecology Department of Latifa Hospital, Dubai, over six months. Self-collected samples were collected by the women in the hospital, followed by clinician sampling using the Qvintip sampling device, and analyzed using the Aptima HPV assay, Panther System (Hologic, Inc, Massachusetts, USA). All participants were given a short questionnaire after the sampling procedure regarding the acceptability and preference of the sampling technique.Descriptive statistics like mean, median, and standard deviation were used to report the participant characteristics. Cross-tabulation analysis was done to calculate the p-value and kappa value (measure of agreement) between the two sampling methods. Inferential statistical analyses were conducted to explore associations between participant demographics and test results, as well as preferences for sample collection methods.
resultsThe findings of this study indicate a high level of agreement between self-collected and clinician-collected samples, as demonstrated by a statistically significant kappa value of 0.889 and a p-value of < 0.001. The prevalence of high-risk HPV was 9% in self-collected samples and 11% in clinician-collected samples, demonstrating consistency in detection rates between the two methods. The feedback from participants underscores the acceptability of self-sampling, with 95% finding it easy to perform, 91% reporting comfort, and 84% reporting no pain during the procedure. Also, 50% of participants expressed a preference for self-sampling over clinician collection. The chi-square test revealed no statistically significant association (χ²(2) = 0.012,
conclusionThis study highlights the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of HPV self-sampling as a primary screening for cervical cancer within a multicultural population in the UAE. Our findings indicate a high level of agreement between self-collected and clinician-collected HPV samples. More than 90% of women were happy with the self-sampling technique, indicating its feasibility as a culturally acceptable and reliable alternative for cervical cancer screening in the UAE.
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.