Literature DB >> 25282406

'Organised' cervical screening 45 years on: How consistent are organised screening practices?

Jane H Williams1, Stacy M Carter2, Lucie Rychetnik3.   

Abstract

Organised screening programmes have been remarkably successful in reducing incidence and mortality from cervical cancer, while opportunistic screening varies in its effectiveness. Experts recommend that cervical screening or HPV testing be carried out only in the context of an organised programme. We sought to answer the following study questions: What does it mean for a cervical screening programme to be organised? Is there a place for opportunistic screening (in an organised programme)? We reviewed 154 peer-reviewed papers on organised and opportunistic approaches to cervical screening published between 1970 and 2014 to understand how the term 'organised' is used, formally and in practice. We found that despite broad recognition of a prescriptive definition of organisation, in practice the meaning of organisation is much less clear. Our review revealed descriptions of organised programmes that differ significantly from prescribed norms and from each other, and a variety of ways that opportunistic and organised programmes intersect. We describe the breadth of the variation in cervical cancer screening programmes and examine the relationships and overlaps between organised and opportunistic screening. Implications emerging from the review include the need to better understand the breadth of organisation in practice, the drivers and impacts of opportunistic screening and the impact of opportunistic screening on population programme outcomes. Appreciation of the complexity of cervical screening programmes will benefit both screeners and women as programmes are changed to reflect a partially vaccinated population, new evidence and new technologies.
Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical smears; Early detection of cancer; Mass Screening; Mass Screening/mt; Mass Screening/og; Neoplasms/pc; Papanicolaou test; Registries; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms; Vaginal smears

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25282406     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.09.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  11 in total

1.  Canadian cancer screening disparities: a recent historical perspective.

Authors:  J Kerner; J Liu; K Wang; S Fung; C Landry; G Lockwood; L Zitzelsberger; V Mai
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Valuing Healthcare Improvement: Implicit Norms, Explicit Normativity, and Human Agency.

Authors:  Stacy M Carter
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2018-06

Review 3.  Breast, cervical and colorectal cancer screening in adults with diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Dominika Bhatia; Iliana C Lega; Wei Wu; Lorraine L Lipscombe
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2019-10-24       Impact factor: 10.122

4.  Impact of opportunistic testing in a systematic cervical cancer screening program: a nationwide registry study.

Authors:  Mette Tranberg; Mette Bach Larsen; Ellen M Mikkelsen; Hans Svanholm; Berit Andersen
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 3.295

5.  Cervical cancer prevention: An Italian scenario between organised screening and human papillomaviruses vaccination.

Authors:  Maria G Cappelli; Francesca Fortunato; Silvio Tafuri; Sara Boccalini; Paolo Bonanni; Rosa Prato; Domenico Martinelli
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Care (Engl)       Date:  2018-09-04       Impact factor: 2.520

6.  Cervical cancer screening patterns among HIV-positive women in Estonia: a population-based retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Anna Tisler; Sven Erik Ojavee; Piret Veerus; Pilleriin Soodla; Anneli Uusküla
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Impact of screening on cervical cancer incidence: A population-based case-control study in the United States.

Authors:  Rebecca Landy; Peter D Sasieni; Christopher Mathews; Charles L Wiggins; Michael Robertson; Yolanda J McDonald; Daniel W Goldberg; Isabel C Scarinci; Jack Cuzick; Cosette M Wheeler
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 7.316

8.  Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening.

Authors:  Steve Sturdy; Fiona Miller; Stuart Hogarth; Natalie Armstrong; Pranesh Chakraborty; Celine Cressman; Mark Dobrow; Kathy Flitcroft; David Grossman; Russell Harris; Barbara Hoebee; Kelly Holloway; Linda Kinsinger; Marlene Krag; Olga Löblová; Ilana Löwy; Anne Mackie; John Marshall; Jane O'Hallahan; Linda Rabeneck; Angela Raffle; Lynette Reid; Graham Shortland; Robert Steele; Beth Tarini; Sian Taylor-Phillips; Bernie Towler; Nynke van der Veen; Marco Zappa
Journal:  Wellcome Open Res       Date:  2020-08-17

Review 9.  Diagnostic tool or screening programme? Asymptomatic testing for SARS-CoV-2 needs clear goals and protocols.

Authors:  Jordan P Skittrall; Mary D Fortune; Hamid Jalal; Hongyi Zhang; David A Enoch; Nicholas M Brown; Anne Swift
Journal:  Lancet Reg Health Eur       Date:  2020-12-15

Review 10.  A comparative analysis of cervical cancer prevention between Nigeria and Nordic countries that have experienced a decline in cervical cancer incidence.

Authors:  Helen I Anyasi; Anna M Foss
Journal:  Int Health       Date:  2021-07-03       Impact factor: 2.473

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.