Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42046158›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2026

Health Care Policy Implementation Trial of Primary Human Papillomavirus-Based Cervical Screening in Denmark.

Jesper Bonde, Jeppe Bennekou Schroll, Birgitte Tønnes Pedersen, Elsebeth Lynge, Marianne Waldstrøm, Petra Hall Viborg, Anna Frandsen, Rikke Holst Andersen, Susanne Nielsen, Doris Schledermann and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Jesper BondeMolecular Pathology Laboratory, Pathology, Afs. 134, AHH-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4853-6747
Jeppe Bennekou SchrollDepartment of Clinical, Research Cochrane Denmark & Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Odense (CEBMO), University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Birgitte Tønnes PedersenMolecular Pathology Laboratory, Pathology, Afs. 134, AHH-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark.
Elsebeth LyngeDepartment of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4785-5236
Marianne WaldstrømDepartment of Pathology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Petra Hall ViborgThe Danish Healthcare Quality Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anna FrandsenDepartment of Pathology, Aalborg University Hospital, Ålborg, Denmark.
Rikke Holst AndersenDepartment of Pathology, Region Hospital Randers, Randers, Denmark.
Susanne NielsenDepartment of Pathology, Region Zealand, Næstved, Denmark.
Doris SchledermannDepartment of Pathology, Lille Baelt Hospital, Vejle, Denmark.
Bettina Kjær KristensenUNICCA-University Research Clinic for Cancer Screening, Department of Public Health Programs, Randers Regional Hospital, Randers, Denmark.
Berit AndersenUNICCA-University Research Clinic for Cancer Screening, Department of Public Health Programs, Randers Regional Hospital, Randers, Denmark.
National Danish Cervical Cancer Screening Steering Committee

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

On mandate from the Danish Health Authority, a nationwide health care policy trial (HCP) of primary HPV screening for women aged 30-59 was initiated in 2021. The aim was to inform on the performance of HPV screening in comparison to existing cytology practice. The HCP trial included all Danish women between 30 and 59 years of age undergoing cervical cancer screening in 2021 (n = 178,323). Women with odd birthdays were screened with HPV screening (n = 91,517), while women born on even dates were screened with cytology (n = 86,806). The follow-up period was individually censored at 18 months from the screening date. Outcomes and intention-to-treat analysis are reported. Overall, 9.1% and 3.0% were HPV or cytology positive on the index sample. Referral to colposcopy upon index sample was 1.9% with HPV and 2.1% with cytology screening. Referral to retest after a positive HPV index sample result was 7.7 higher for HPV than cytology. Combining index and retest rounds, 6.3% women had colposcopy in the HPV arm (RR 1.28) versus 4,9% in the cytology arm. HPV screening detected both more disease ≥ CIN2 (RR 1.51) and ≥ CIN3 (RR1.35). The national-scale health care policy implementation trial showed that HPV-based cervical cancer screening increased detection of histologically defined disease compared to the previous policy of cytology-based screening for women 30-59 years of age. The HCP demonstrated the real-life effect of HPV-based screening over cytology-based screening in detection of disease, but also details what to be expected in terms of health care resource requirements.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerHealth PolicyHuman Papillomavirus VirusesPapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAdultColposcopyDenmarkFemaleHumansMass ScreeningMiddle AgedUterine Cervical DysplasiaVaginal Smearscervical cancer screeningcytologyhealth care policyHPV

Identifiers

PMID42046158
PMCPMC13397258

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.