ArticleReproductive health2026
Population-based self-sampling under primary care conditions - a possible approach for cervical cancer screening in Indonesia (IndoCerCa study).
Article in Reproductive health, 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
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIn low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), cervical cancer is a major burden. Screening is mainly based on visual inspection lacking sufficient sensitivity and specificity. For roll-out of colposcopy-based early detection sufficient qualified staff is not available. Several self-sampling device products have been proposed as alternative, but their usability in primary care needs to be proven. Implementation of an HPV-based self-sampling approach in a population-based setting in Indonesia was evaluated.
methodsFour self-sampling devices (2 urine, 2 swab) were applied in a primary care setting covering an entire district in Indonesia with Kulon Progo as pilot region. Cluster randomization was used for comparison of rural and urban areas. HPV-testing was done using standardized and validated PCR-techniques. HPV-positive women and a randomly selected HPV-negative control group underwent colposcopy, PAP smears and biopsies for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) validation.
resultsIn 21 primary care units 2056 women (30-55 y) were recruited. Three devices achieved sufficient technical validation (92.1 - 99.7% DNA detection rate). Participant's test acceptance was 99.1%. HPV-prevalence was 2.6% (urine 2.4%, swab 2.8%). In 29.4% of HPV-positive women high-risk HPV-16/18 were detected. Colposcopy and morphological examination were refused by 3.0% of HPV-positive women and were technically invalid in 5.0%. Pathology revealed Negative for Intraepithelial Lesion or Malignancy (NILM) in 55.8%, CIN I in 25.0% and CIN II + in 3.8%. In the control group CIN I was found in 2.0%. This resulted in a sensitivity of 27.4% for all CIN and 100.0% for CIN II + , with specificities of 98.5% and 97.7%, respectively. The negative predictive values (NPV) were 97.9% and 100.0%, and positive predictive values (PPV) were 34.1% and 4.5%. Regression analysis confirmed high negative predictive impact of HPV-negativity in women > 40 years.
conclusionsUnder primary care setting self-sampling-based HPV-testing is accepted. Urine- and swab-based techniques can be applied if the test systems provide technically valid DNA-detection rates. The prevalence was very low and requires further comparison within Indonesia. High NPV of this approach supports its applicability as screening in LMICs. For high-risk lesions PPV is still low suggesting a combination with additional test that are mainly independent from the availability of qualified staff.
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.