Sociodemographic factors associated with cervical cancer screening coverage and follow-up of high grade abnormal results in a population-based cohort
Abstract
Introduction A cervical cytology based screening program is effective if there is regular screening of the 'at risk' population and close follow-up of those labeled abnormal. Methods This is a population cohort study of women between 20-69 year old who were eligible in Ontario from 2008-2010. We used administrative data to evaluate the rates of cervical cancer screening and follow-up of high grade Pap tests. Variation in cervical cytology coverage and follow-up of high grade abnormal results are associated with age, area level income and health region. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with screening and followup. Results 3.7million women were eligible for screening of which 72% had a Pap smear in the prior 3years. These rates varied by age, income and region (p Conclusions Despite universal health coverage, cervical cancer screening rates are suboptimal with older and low income women being at greatest risk. Follow-up among women with high grade abnormal tests is mediocre at 3months and acceptable at 6months. Novel models of cervical cancer screening program implementation are needed to address these inadequacies.
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?
Certain groups of the target population do not attend screening.
“Second, certain groups of the target population do not attend screening.15 16 17”
From Detecting cervical precancer and reaching underscreened women by using HPV testing on self samples: updated meta-analyses (2018) · cites this paper as [15]
Cites
Interventions That Increase Use of Adult Immunization and Cancer Screening Services: A Meta-Analysis
Stone, E. G., Morton, S. C., Hulscher, M. E., Maglione, M. A., Roth, E. A., Grimshaw, J. M., Mittman, B. S., Rubenstein, L. V., Rubenstein, L. Z., & Shekelle, P. G. (2002) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-136-9-200205070-00006 · Cited by 613 · see citing works
Yabroff, K. R., Washington, K. S., Leader, A., Neilson, E., & Mandelblatt, J. (2003) · Medical Care Research and Review · doi:10.1177/1077558703254698 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Arbyn, M., Smith, S. B., Temin, S., Sultana, F., & Castle, P. (2018) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.k4823 · Cited by 851 · see citing works
- Authors
- Elit, L., Saskin, R., Raut, R., Elliott, L., Murphy, J., & Marrett, L.
- Affiliations
- Cancer Care Ontario (CA)
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Elit, L.
- Venue
- Gynecologic Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 128
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 95-100
- ISSN
- 0090-8258 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2041009410
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 2.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Gynecologic Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES)
- Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (MOHLTC)
- 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
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
- Keywords
- cervical cancer screening, Pap smear, screening follow-up, sociodemographic factors, income inequality, health disparities, colposcopy, Ontario, screening coverage
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Colposcopy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Vaginal Smears, Cohort Studies, Logistic Models, Early Detection of Cancer, Papanicolaou Test
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