ArticleNPJ digital medicine2026
Trends in over- and under-screening for cervical cancer after EMR implementation in rural China.
Article in NPJ digital medicine, 2026. 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
Abstract
Inappropriate cervical cancer screening practices, including over- and under-screening, pose significant healthcare burdens in low-resource settings. This study analyzed screening behaviors and determinants among 33,362 women aged 35-64 in Wuxiang County, China, using longitudinal cohort data. Screening events were classified as guideline-adherent, over-screened, under-screened, or unscreened based on prior methods (HPV, cytology, or co-testing) and results, using cause-specific frailty models for analysis. Overall, only 19.9% of events were guideline-adherent, while 29.5% were over-screened and 50.6% were under- or unscreened. Notably, the implementation of a county-wide Electronic Medical Record (EMR) platform in 2022 coincided with a sharp decline in over-screening from 36.7% to 15.7%. Compared with primary HPV testing, prior co-testing increased the hazard of both over- and under-screening, whereas prior cytology was strongly associated with under-screening. Women with low-grade abnormalities (≤CIN1) showed a substantially higher risk of under-screening compared to those with negative results. Additionally, community residents were more prone to over-screening, while village residents faced higher under-screening risks. These findings suggest that transitioning to HPV-based screening and integrating EMR systems effectively reduces unnecessary testing, though enhanced reminder systems are crucial to address persistent under-screening in resource-constrained regions.
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.