ArticleSexually transmitted diseases2026
Underscreened Women's Reactions to At-Home Self-Collected Human Papillomavirus Test Result Delivery.
Article in Sexually transmitted diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acceptability and Feasibility of Home-Based Human Papillomavirus Self-Testing as Primary Screening for Cervical Cancer Detection in the State of Alabama.Journal of community health · 2026Article
- Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical Cytology Among Vulnerable Women in Rome, Italy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMailed self-collection kits for high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) detection can increase access to cervical cancer screening among underscreened women. To design effective screening programs, it is necessary to evaluate women's understanding, reactions, and preferences for self-collected HPV test result delivery.
methodsThe My Body, My Test-3 trial assessed the effectiveness of mailed HPV self-collection kit outreach. Between 2016 and 2019, the trial enrolled low-income women aged 25 to 64 years in North Carolina overdue for cervical cancer screening. Our analytical sample included women from the intervention arm who conducted at-home self-collection, returned a self-collection kit, had a conclusive HPV result, and completed a follow-up survey after results were received by phone but before in-clinic screening. We evaluated women's understanding, reactions, and preferences for result delivery, stratified by result positivity.
resultsAmong 296 diverse, low-income women, 16% (n = 47/296) had an HPV-positive result and 84% (n = 249/296) had an HPV-negative result. Most women understood their results as an indicator of cervical cancer risk, and 93% (n = 264/284 who responded) correctly recalled their results 1 week post-receipt. Women with a positive result more frequently reported feeling afraid and worried, and less frequently reported feeling relieved, compared with those with a negative result (all P < 0.001). Most women were comfortable receiving results by phone (HPV-positive result: 85%, n = 40/47; HPV-negative result: 96%, n = 238/249), although some with a positive result had remaining questions.
conclusionsAlthough most women delivered their mailed, self-collected HPV result by phone understood their result, future US screening programs should provide educational support during and after HPV-positive result delivery.
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.