Association between comorbidity and participation in breast and cervical cancer screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 7-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abbey Diaz ◽  
Jimin Kang ◽  
Suzanne P Moore ◽  
Peter Baade ◽  
Danette Langbecker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Breast And Cervical Cancer

The impact of level of education on adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening: Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 81 ◽  
pp. 281-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gianfranco Damiani ◽  
Danila Basso ◽  
Anna Acampora ◽  
Caterina B.N.A. Bianchi ◽  
Giulia Silvestrini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Breast And Cervical Cancer ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Self-sampling for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. e001351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ping Teresa Yeh ◽  
Caitlin E Kennedy ◽  
Hugo de Vuyst ◽  
Manjulaa Narasimhan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Screening Uptake ◽  
Screening Frequency

IntroductionHuman papillomavirus (HPV) self-sampling test kits may increase screening for and early detection of cervical cancer and reduce its burden globally. To inform WHO self-care guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of HPV self-sampling among adult women on cervical (pre-)cancer screening uptake, screening frequency, social harms/adverse events and linkage to clinical assessment/treatment.MethodsThe included studies compared women using cervical cancer screening services with HPV self-sampling with women using standard of care, measured at least one outcome, and were published in a peer-reviewed journal. We searched PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CNIAHL), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and Embase through October 2018. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Evidence Project tool for non-randomised studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models to generate pooled estimates of relative risk (RR).Results33 studies in 34 articles with 369 017 total participants met the inclusion criteria: 29 RCTs and 4 observational studies. All studies examined HPV self-sampling; comparison groups were standard of care (eg, Pap smear, visual inspection with acetic acid, clinician-collected HPV testing). 93% of participants were from high-income countries. All 33 studies measured cervical cancer screening uptake. Meta-analysis found greater screening uptake among HPV self-sampling participants compared with control (RR: 2.13, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.40). Effect size varied by HPV test kit dissemination method, whether mailed directly to home (RR: 2.27, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.71), offered door-to-door (RR: 2.37, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.03) or requested on demand (RR: 1.28, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.82). Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in linkage to clinical assessment/treatment between arms (RR: 1.12, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.57). No studies measured screening frequency or social harms/adverse events.ConclusionA growing evidence base, mainly from high-income countries and with significant heterogeneity, suggests HPV self-sampling can increase cervical cancer screening uptake compared with standard of care, with a marginal effect on linkage to clinical assessment/treatment.Systematic review registration numberPROSPERO CRD42018114871.

scholarly journals Accuracy of Self-report for Cervical and Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Anderson ◽  
Donald S. Bourne ◽  
Kim A. Peterson ◽  
Katherine M. Mackey
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Self Report ◽  
System Level

Abstract Background: Guideline-based breast and cervical cancer screenings are fundamental components of high-quality preventive women’s health care services. Accurate measurement of screening rates is vital to ensure all women are adequately screened. Our systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide an updated synthesis of the evidence on the accuracy of self-reported measures of cervical and breast cancer screening compared to medical records. Methods: To identify studies, we searched MEDLINE®, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and other sources up to July 2019. Two reviewers sequentially selected studies, abstracted data, and assessed internal validity and strength of the evidence. Adjusted summary numbers for sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis. Results: Unscreened women tended to over-report screening among 39 included studies examining the accuracy of self-report for cervical and/or breast cancer screening. The specificity of self-report was 48% (95% CI 41 to 56) for cervical cancer screening and 61% (95% CI 53 to 69) for breast cancer screening while the sensitivity of self-report was much higher at 96% (95% CI 94 to 97) for cervical cancer screening and 96% (95% CI 95 to 98). We have moderate confidence in these findings, as they come from a large number of studies directly assessing the accuracy of self-report compared to medical records and are consistent with findings from a previous meta-analysis. Conclusions: Unscreened women tend to over-report cervical and breast cancer screening, while screened women more accurately report their screening. Future research should focus on assessing the impact of over-reporting on clinical and system-level outcomes.

scholarly journals Knowledge, attitude and practice of cervical cancer screening among women infected with HIV in Africa: Systematic review and meta-analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0249960
Author(s):  
Agajie Likie Bogale ◽  
Tilahun Teklehaymanot ◽  
Jemal Haidar Ali ◽  
Getnet Mitike Kassie
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Cervical Cancer Screening ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
African Women ◽  
Female Population ◽  
Attitudes And Practices ◽  
Attitude And Practice ◽  
Knowledge Attitude And Practice

Background To establish successful strategies and increasing the utilization of preventive services, there is a need to explore the extent to which the general female population is aware and use the service for cervical cancer-screening among women infected with HIV in Africa. Available evidences in this regard are controversial and non-conclusive on this potential issue and therefore, we estimated the pooled effect of the proportion of knowledge, attitude and practice of HIV infected African women towards cervical cancer screening to generate evidence for improved prevention strategies. Methods We applied a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted in Africa and reported the proportion of knowledge, attitude and practice towards cervical cancer screening. We searched electronic databases: PubMed/Medline, SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, Web of science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and allied Health Sciences (CINAHL) and Google scholar databases to retrieve papers published in English language till August 2020. We used random-effects model to estimate the pooled effect, and funnel plot to assess publication bias. The registration number of this review study protocol is CRD42020210879. Results In this review, we included eight published papers comprising 2,186 participants. The estimated pooled proportion of knowledge of the participants was 43.0% (95%CI:23.0–64.0) while the pooled estimates of attitudes and practices were 38.0% (95%CI: 1.0–77.0) and 41.0% (95%CI: 4.0–77.0), respectively. The proportion of the outcome variables were extremely heterogeneous across the studies with I2> 98%). Conclusion The pooled estimates of knowledge, attitude and practice were lower than other middle income countries calls for further activities to enhance the uptake of the services and establish successful strategies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document