Cited by 38Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

Sociodemographic factors associated with cervical cancer screening coverage and follow-up of high grade abnormal results in a population-based cohort

Elit, L., Saskin, R., Raut, R., Elliott, L., Murphy, J., Marrett, L.·2013·Gynecologic Oncology

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

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.10.006

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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