ReviewNigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association
A comparative study of Pap test and colposcopy in the evaluation of unhealthy cervix in a tertiary care hospital serving a rural population of West Bengal.
Review in Nigerian medical journal : journal of the Nigeria Medical Association. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cervical cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality among women in developing countries. Early detection through effective screening is crucial for reducing morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of Pap smear and colposcopy as screening tools for detecting cervical premalignant and malignant lesions among symptomatic women at a tertiary care centre serving the Sundarban region of West Bengal. Methodology: A hospital-based prospective study was conducted among 110 sexually active women aged 21-50 years presenting with symptoms suggestive of an unhealthy cervix. Participants underwent Pap smear examination followed by colposcopy and colposcopy-guided biopsy. Histopathological examination served as the gold standard for diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy were calculated for both screening modalities, and agreement was assessed using Cohen's kappa. Results: The mean age of participants was 33.2±4.1 years, with 41.8% aged 31-40 years. White vaginal discharge was the most common presenting complaint (50.9%), followed by intermenstrual bleeding (33.6%). Histopathological examination revealed premalignant and malignant conditions in 13.6% of participants. Cervical pathology was significantly associated with lower socioeconomic status (p<0.001), early pregnancy (p=0.004), multiple sexual partners (p=0.002), history of STI (p<0.001), and prolonged OCP use (p<0.001). Pap test demonstrated 33.3% sensitivity and 97.9% specificity, while colposcopy showed superior performance with 86.7% sensitivity and 80.0% specificity. Agreement between Pap and colposcopy was weak (κ = 0.284). Conclusion: Colposcopy demonstrates significantly higher sensitivity than Pap smear for detecting cervical lesions among symptomatic women, although the two tests demonstrated only weak concordance. While both methods provide useful information where HPV-based screening is not widely available, combined use should be considered cautiously, given resource constraints.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42471888PMC13379852What 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.