Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 468

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

HPV DNA Testing of Self-collected Vaginal Samples Compared With Cytologic Screening to Detect Cervical Cancer

Wright, Jr, Thomas C.·2000·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: More than half of the women diagnosed as having cervical cancer in the United States have not been screened within the last 3 years, despite many having had contact with the health care system. In many other regions of the world, there is only limited access to cervical cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether testing of self-collected vaginal swabs for human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA can be used to screen for cervical disease in women aged 35 years and older. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study comparing Papanicolaou smears with HPV DNA testing of self-collected vaginal swabs. SETTING: Outpatient clinics in a periurban settlement outside of Cape Town, South Africa, between January 1998 and April 1999. PARTICIPANTS: Screening was performed on 1415 previously unscreened black South African women aged 35 to 65 years. INTERVENTION: Women self-collected a vaginal swab for HPV testing in the clinic and were then screened using 4 different tests: Papanicolaou smear, direct visual inspection of the cervix after the application of 5% acetic acid, cervicography, and HPV DNA testing of a clinician-obtained cervical sample. Women with abnormal results on any of the screening tests were referred for colposcopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions or invasive cancer. RESULTS: High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions were identified in 47 (3.4%) of 1365 women adequately assessed, and there were 9 cases of invasive cancer. Of women with high-grade disease, 66.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.1%-77.8%) had high risk for HPV detected in self-collected vaginal samples, and 67.9% (95% CI, 53.9%-79.4%) had an abnormal Papanicolaou smear (P = .78). The false-positive rates for HPV DNA testing of self-collected vaginal samples and Papanicolaou smears were 17.1% (95% CI, 15.1%-19.3%) and 12.3% (95% CI, 10.5%-14.2%), respectively (P<.001). A high-risk type of HPV DNA was detected in 83.9% (95% CI, 71.2%-91.9%) of women with high-grade disease and 15.5% (95% CI, 13.6%-17.7%) of women with no evidence of cervical disease using a clinician-obtained cervical sample. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that HPV testing of self-collected vaginal swabs is less specific than but as sensitive as Papanicolaou smears for detecting high-grade cervical disease in women aged 35 years and older, and HPV testing offers an important new way to increase screening in settings where cytology is not readily performed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.283.1.81

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 468

Metadata

Authors
Wright, Jr.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2000-01-05
Volume
283
Issue
1
Pages
81
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2112935959
Cited by
468
References
0
FWCI
32.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: HPV DNA Testing of Self-collected Vaginal Samples Compared With Cytologic Screening to Detect Cervical Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.283.1.81
The paper
Wright, Jr. (2000). HPV DNA Testing of Self-collected Vaginal Samples Compared With Cytologic Screening to Detect Cervical Cancer. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.283.1.81

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.