ArticlePeerJ2025
Retrospective analysis of cervical screening abnormalities in women with type 3 transformation zone without visible lesions.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Postoperative Outcomes of the Manchester-Fothergill Procedure: Cervical Cytology Adequacy and Transformation Zone Accessibility: A Prospective Cohort Study.International urogynecology journal · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Women with abnormal cervical screening but without visible lesions, particularly those with a type 3 transformation zone (TZ3), present a clinical challenge due to the non-visible squamocolumnar junction, increasing the risk of missed high-grade lesions. There is currently no consensus on optimal follow-up strategies for this group. This study aims to evaluate a risk-based management approach for these patients. Methods: A cross-sectional study analyzed data from 4,648 women with TZ3 who underwent colposcopy and endocervical curettage (ECC) with or without cervical biopsies at Hunan Provincial Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital (2021-2024). Logistic regression with restricted cubic splines analyzed demographic, cytological and HPV data to identify HSIL+ predictors and age-risk thresholds. Results: Among the study population, 3.1% (145 cases) of HSIL+ were identified despite negative colposcopy, although additional undetected cases may exist. Women with high-grade cytology (ASC-H/HSIL/AGC) had a consistently high HSIL+ risk (32.5%-37.2%) across all HPV subgroups. In low-grade cytology (NILM/ASCUS/LSIL), HPV 16/18 positivity increased HSIL+ risk (2.4%-5.0%) compared to non-HPV 16/18 cases (1.6%-1.8%), with the highest rate observed in LSIL cases (5.0%). In women with low-grade cytology and non-HPV 16/18 positivity, age and HSIL+ risk showed a nonlinear relationship (RCS P-nonlinear = 0.008). Threshold analysis identified 55 years as a critical cutoff, with a 10% annual increase in HSIL+ risk for women ≥ 55. (OR = 1.10, 95% CI [1.02-1.19]; Conclusion: Among women with abnormal cervical screening and no visible lesions at type 3 transformation zone, HSIL+ risk varies by cytology, HPV genotype, and age. Our findings suggest that immediate diagnostic evaluation is warranted for those with high-grade cytology, HPV 16/18 with LSIL, and women aged ≥ 65 years with low-grade cytology and non-16/18 HPV, as their HSIL+ risk exceeds the 4% threshold recommended by current US guidelines. Conversely, women under 65 with low-grade cytology and non-16/18 HPV, or those with NILM/ASCUS and HPV 16/18, may be appropriate candidates for conservative follow-up. These results support a more tailored, risk-based approach to management in this challenging 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.