Results of a community‐based cervical cancer screening pilot project using human papillomavirus self‐sampling in Kampala, Uganda
Abstract
Objective: To examine the feasibility of a community‐based screening program using human papillomavirus (HPV) self‐sampling in a low‐income country with a high burden of cervical cancer. Methods: A pilot study was conducted among 205 women aged 30–69 years in the Kisenyi district of Kampala, Uganda, from September 5 to October 30, 2011. Women were invited to provide a self‐collected specimen for high‐risk oncogenic HPV testing by outreach workers at their homes and places of gathering in their community. Specimens were tested for HPV, Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis. Women who tested positive for HPV were referred for colposcopy, biopsy, and treatment at a regional hospital. Results: Of the 199 women who provided a specimen, 35 (17.6%) tested positive for HPV. The outreach workers were able to provide results to 30 women (85.7%). In all, 26 (74.3%) of the women infected with HPV attended their colposcopy appointments and 4 (11.4%) women were diagnosed with grade 3 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Conclusion: Self‐collection of samples for community‐based HPV testing was an acceptable option; most women who tested positive attended for definitive treatment. Self‐sampling could potentially allow for effective recruitment to screening programs in limited‐resource settings.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Only a few studies have provided self-sampling in community settings.
“Though other studies have compared HPV collection through clinician versus self-sampling [18] only a few studies have provided self-sampling in community settings [15, 19]”
Studies have confirmed high acceptability of HPV self-sampling in different settings.
“Studies have confirmed a high acceptability to HPV self-sampling in different settings [15, 18, 19].”
The finding on pelvic exam as a barrier to screening is consistent with other studies done in Africa and Asia which showed concerns around speculum use, embarrassment, and reluctance to have a male provider perform the exam.
“The findings on pelvic exam as a barrier to screening is consistent with other studies done in Africa and Asia [18, 19, 33–35] which showed concerns around speculum use, embarrassment, and reluctance to have a male provider perform the exam [37–39].”
The finding that women in rural western Kenya had positive expectations of and personal experiences with HPV self-sampling is consistent with other studies done in Africa and Asia.
“which is consistent to other studies done in Africa and Asia [18, 19, 33–35].”
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Oketch, S. Y., Kwena, Z., Choi, Y., Adewumi, K., Moghadassi, M., Bukusi, E. A., & Huchko, M. J. (2019) · BMC Women's Health · doi:10.1186/s12905-019-0778-2 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Cadman, L., Wilkes, S., Mansour, D., Austin, J., Ashdown-Barr, L., Edwards, R., Kleeman, M., & Szarewski, A. (2015) · Journal of Medical Screening · doi:10.1177/0969141314558785 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
- Authors
- Ogilvie, G. S., Mitchell, S., Sekikubo, M., Biryabarema, C., Byamugisha, J., Jeronimo, J., Miller, D., Steinberg, M., & Money, D. M.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Makerere University (UG)
- Simon Fraser University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Ogilvie, Gina S.
- ORCID
- Venue
- International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-06-02
- Volume
- 122
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 118-123
- ISSN
- 0020-6695 (ISSN-L)
- 0020-7292
- 1879-3479
- OpenAlex
- W2027351354
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 3.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Clinical Investigator Program
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
- Keywords
- cervical cancer screening, HPV self-sampling, community-based screening, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, outreach workers, low-income settings, screening feasibility, Kampala, Uganda
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Uterine Cervical Dysplasia, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Colposcopy, Community Health Services, Feasibility Studies, Female, Humans, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Self Care, Specimen Handling, Uganda, Papillomaviridae, Papillomavirus Infections
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
