ArticleScientific reports2026
Cervical cancer screening coverage and care cascade in Tamil Nadu, India, based on a community-based cross-sectional survey.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Low-and middle-income countries, including India, contribute to over 80% of cervical cancer deaths in the world. Maintaining the continuum of care during screening and diagnosis is important for early detection of cervical cancer. We assessed the screening coverage and care cascade for cervical cancer in Tamil Nadu, a southern state in India with a population of over 78 million. We conducted a state-wide STEPwise approach to NCD risk factor surveillance (STEPS) survey in Tamil Nadu in 2024. We embedded a cervical cancer screening module and interviewed 4184 women aged 30–69 years with the module. We selected the participants using the multistage cluster sampling technique. We present the lifetime screening coverage and each stage of the care cascade after screening positive, as percentages, using complex survey analysis. We did a multivariable regression analysis to determine the factors associated with screening and reported the adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Of the 4184 women, the mean (SD) age was 48 (11) years and 3230 (77%) were currently married. About 10% (n = 423, 95% CI: 9%-12%) were ever screened for cervical cancer. Among screened (N = 423), 108 (26%) were screen-positive, 62 (15%) were referred for colposcopy, 56 (13%) underwent colposcopy, 42 (10%) had abnormal findings, 38 (9%) underwent biopsy, and 1 (0.2%) was diagnosed with cancer. Screening was higher among 45–59 year-old women (13%) than 30–44 year-olds (9%) [PR-1.52, 95% CI: 1.20–1.93], among those with education above class 8 (12%) [aPR-2.01; 95% CI: 1.45–2.79] than those with no formal education (7%) and among those with a history of diabetes mellitus (13% vs. 10%) [aPR-1.35, 95% CI: 1.03–1.79]. Referral of screen-positive women for the colposcopy examination was the major bottleneck in the cascade. Training healthcare providers to improve patient-provider communication and prompt referrals can improve cancer detection.
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.