ArticleJournal of medical screening2026
The co-creation of a document to guide the use of self-sampling for human papillomavirus screening in Italy.
Article in Journal of medical screening, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundVulnerable women face a higher risk of cervical cancer and reduced access to screening. Self-sampling may increase access to human papillomavirus screening. In this article, we report the co-creation of a document to guide the implementation of human papillomavirus self-sampling in Italy.MethodsWorking CollaBoratively with vulnerable women to Identify the best implementation Gains by SCREEning cervical cancer more effectively in European countries (CBIG-SCREEN) project, a Collaborative User Board has been set up in Italy, including national decision-makers, healthcare providers, and vulnerable women. To ensure that women's direct perspectives were incorporated into the process, informal individual interviews were carried out and brought to the Collaborative User Board meetings. The Collaborative User Board discussion was based on systematic reviews, screening program reports, and Italy's self-sampling pilots. Results were summarized with a matrix of vulnerable groups and barriers to evaluate interventions' potential ability to remove barriers. Considerations were collected in a document for screening program coordinators and decision-makers.ResultsThe Collaborative User Board identified major barriers to cervical cancer screening among different vulnerable groups and assessed five evidence-based strategies to address them: multilingual structured invitation letters, group training led by cultural mediators, training for healthcare professionals, training for third-sector operators, and self-sampling. Evaluating the potential of these strategies to remove barriers led to a focus on self-sampling. Mailing the device to all non-responders was the only strategy with sufficient evidence to increase participation in Italy. An opportunistic offer in a setting attended by vulnerable women is promising. The Collaborative User Board underscored the importance of improving healthcare providers' communication.ConclusionsThe final document, created through a transparent and collaborative bottom-up process, collects considerations for implementing self-sampling for human papillomavirus testing.
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.