ArticleBMJ global health2026
Comparative efficacy, feasibility and acceptability of HPV DNA testing on first-void urine versus self-collected vaginal samples: a real-world study in a resource-limited setting.
Article in BMJ global health, 2026. 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.
- Agreement and Diagnostic Performance of Urinary HPV Testing Versus Clinician-Collected Cervico-Vaginal Sampling: A Prospective Cross-Sectional Study in a Romanian Cohort.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSelf-sampling for cervical cancer screening is a promising strategy to improve coverage and reduce strain on health systems. First-void urine (FVU) has emerged as a non-invasive alternative to self-collected vaginal samples for detecting high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV). However, most supporting evidence is from colposcopy clinic settings and not from screening settings. This community-based study in Eastern India aimed to (1) assess agreement between HPV testing on FVU and vaginal samples, (2) compare their accuracy in detecting cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2+) lesions and (3) evaluate feasibility and acceptability in a resource-limited setting.
methodsAt multiple rural clinics, 2500 women aged 30-60 years provided both FVU and self-collected vaginal samples. All samples were tested centrally using the Cobas4800 assay; discordant results were retested with the Allplex HR-HPV assay. HPV-positive women were referred for colposcopy and biopsy. Acceptability and preference were assessed through structured surveys with 1500 women and focus group discussions with health workers. These health workers counselled women at the clinics to provide both self-collected samples.
resultsAll participants provided satisfactory samples, except for two FVU samples, which did not yield satisfactory test results on repeated analysis. Agreement between FVU and vaginal samples for HPV detection was 99.0% (κ=0.90), with high concordance for HPV 16/18 (κ=0.90). CIN2+ detection rates were 6.0 and 7.2 per 1000 women screened with FVU and vaginal samples, respectively (p=0.6), with no statistically significant difference in sensitivity. Among surveyed women, 98.1% preferred urine sampling. Health workers favoured both self-sampling methods over speculum-based clinician collection.
conclusionHPV testing using FVU demonstrates high agreement with vaginal self-sampling, comparable accuracy in detecting CIN2+ lesions and greater acceptability among women. This method is feasible and well-suited for cervical cancer screening in resource-limited settings.
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.