Rural studies examine satisfaction with and cost-effectiveness of telecolposcopy for women with abnormal Pap smears

2004 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pap Smears ◽  
Rural Studies

Does Cost–Effectiveness Analysis Make a Difference? Lessons from Pap Smears

2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-323
Author(s):  
J. Tsevat ◽  
M.D. Hagen ◽  
A.M. Garber ◽  
S.J. Goldie ◽  
J.E. Lafata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Pap Smears ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

Cost-effectiveness of liquid-based cytology with or without hybrid-capture II HPV test compared with conventional Pap smears: A study by the French society of clinical cytology

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 338-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Béatrix Cochand-Priollet ◽  
Isabelle Cartier ◽  
Patricia de Cremoux ◽  
Catherine Le Galès ◽  
Marianne Ziol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pap Smears ◽  
French Society ◽  
Hybrid Capture ◽  
Hpv Test ◽  
Liquid Based Cytology

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of repeated self-sampling for HPV testing in primary cervical screening: a randomized study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riina Aarnio ◽  
Ellinor Östensson ◽  
Matts Olovsson ◽  
Inger Gustavsson ◽  
Ulf Gyllensten
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pap Smear ◽  
Lower Cost ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Pap Smears ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Randomized Clinical Study ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

Abstract Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is recommended in primary cervical screening to improve cancer prevention. An advantage of HPV testing is that it can be performed on self-samples, which could increase population coverage and result in a more efficient strategy to identify women at risk of developing cervical cancer. Our objective was to assess whether repeated self-sampling for HPV testing is cost-effective in comparison with Pap smear cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) in increasing participation rate in primary cervical screening.Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed on data from a previously published randomized clinical study including 36 390 women aged 30–49 years. Participants were randomized either to perform repeated self-sampling of vaginal fluid for HPV testing (n = 17 997, HPV self-sampling arm) or to midwife-collected Pap smears for cytological analysis (n = 18 393, Pap smear arm). Results Self-sampling for HPV testing led to 1633 more screened women and 107 more histologically diagnosed CIN2+ at a lower cost vs. midwife-collected Pap smears (€ 229 446 vs. € 782 772). Conclusions This study resulted in that repeated self-sampling for HPV testing increased participation and detection of CIN2+ at a lower cost than midwife-collected Pap smears in primary cervical screening. Offering women a home-based self-sampling may therefore be a more cost-effective alternative than clinic-based screening.Trial registration Not registered since this trial is a secondary analysis of an earlier published study (1).

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness analysis of repeated self-sampling for HPV testing in primary cervical screening: a randomized study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riina Aarnio ◽  
Ellinor Östensson ◽  
Matts Olovsson ◽  
Inger Gustavsson ◽  
Ulf Gyllensten
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pap Smear ◽  
Lower Cost ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Pap Smears ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Randomized Clinical Study ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

Abstract Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is recommended in primary cervical screening to improve cancer prevention. An advantage of HPV testing is that it can be performed on self-samples, which could increase population coverage and result in a more efficient strategy to identify women at risk of developing cervical cancer. Our objective was to assess whether repeated self-sampling for HPV testing is cost-effective in comparison with Pap smear cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) in increasing participation rate in primary cervical screening.Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed on data from a previously published randomized clinical study including 36 390 women aged 30–49 years. Participants were randomized either to perform repeated self-sampling of vaginal fluid for HPV testing (n = 17 997, HPV self-sampling arm) or to midwife-collected Pap smears for cytological analysis (n = 18 393, Pap smear arm). Results Self-sampling for HPV testing led to 1633 more screened women and 107 more histologically diagnosed CIN2+ at a lower cost vs. midwife-collected Pap smears (€ 229 446 vs. € 782 772). Conclusions This study resulted in that repeated self-sampling for HPV testing increased participation and detection of CIN2+ at a lower cost than midwife-collected Pap smears in primary cervical screening. Offering women a home-based self-sampling may therefore be a more cost-effective alternative than clinic-based screening.Trial registration Not registered since this trial is a secondary analysis of an earlier published study (1).

Cost-Effectiveness of Liquid-Based Cytology with or without Hybrid-Capture II HPV Test Compared with Conventional Pap Smears

2006 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
B Cochand-Priollet ◽  
I Cartier ◽  
P de Cremoux ◽  
C Le Gales ◽  
M Ziol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pap Smears ◽  
Hybrid Capture ◽  
Hpv Test ◽  
Liquid Based Cytology

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Repeated Self-Sampling for HPV Testing in Primary Cervical Screening: A Randomized Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riina Aarnio ◽  
Ellinor Östensson ◽  
Matts Olovsson ◽  
Inger Gustavsson ◽  
Ulf Gyllensten
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pap Smear ◽  
Lower Cost ◽  
Cervical Screening ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Pap Smears ◽  
Hpv Testing ◽  
Randomized Clinical Study ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

Abstract Background Human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is recommended in primary cervical screening to improve cancer prevention. An advantage of HPV testing is that it can be performed on self-samples, which could increase population coverage and result in a more efficient strategy to identify women at risk of developing cervical cancer. Our objective was to assess whether repeated self-sampling for HPV testing is cost-effective in comparison with Pap smear cytology for detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more (CIN2+) in increasing participation rate in primary cervical screening.Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed on data from a previously published randomized clinical study including 36 390 women aged 30–49 years. Participants were randomized either to perform repeated self-sampling of vaginal fluid for HPV testing (n = 17 997, HPV self-sampling arm) or to midwife-collected Pap smears for cytological analysis (n = 18 393, Pap smear arm).Results Self-sampling for HPV testing led to 1633 more screened women and 107 more histologically diagnosed CIN2 + at a lower cost vs. midwife-collected Pap smears (€ 229 446 vs. € 782 772).Conclusions This study resulted in that repeated self-sampling for HPV testing increased participation and detection of CIN2 + at a lower cost than midwife-collected Pap smears in primary cervical screening. Offering women a home-based self-sampling may therefore be a more cost-effective alternative than clinic-based screening.Trial registration Not registered since this trial is a secondary analysis of an earlier published study (1).

Cost-effectiveness of dental implants: a utility analysis

1990 ◽  
Vol 54 (11) ◽  
pp. 688-689 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Jacobson ◽  
B Maxson ◽  
K Mays ◽  
J Peebles ◽  
C Kowalski
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Dental Implants ◽  
Utility Analysis
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document