CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 118Cervical Cancer and HPV ResearchWomen's cancer prevention and managementEndometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Practice Bulletin No. 157: Cervical Cancer Screening and Prevention

·2016·Obstetrics & Gynecology
DOI 10.1097/aog.0000000000001263
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The incidence of cervical cancer in the United States has decreased more than 50% in the past 30 years because of widespread screening. In 1975, the rate was 14.8 per 100,000 women. By 2011, it decreased to 6.7 per 100,000 women. Mortality from the disease has undergone a similar decrease from 5.55 per 100,000 women in 1975 to 2.3 per 100,000 women in 2011 (). The American Cancer Society (ACS) estimated that there would be 12,900 new cases of cervical cancer in the United States in 2015, with 4,100 deaths from the disease (). Cervical cancer is much more common worldwide, particularly in countries without screening programs, with an estimated 527,624 new cases of the disease and 265,672 resultant deaths each year (). When cervical cancer screening programs have been introduced into communities, marked reductions in cervical cancer incidence have followed ().New technologies for cervical cancer screening continue to evolve, as do recommendations for managing the results. In addition, there are different risk-benefit considerations for women at different ages, as reflected in age-specific screening recommendations. In 2011, the ACS, the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP), and the American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP) updated their joint guidelines for cervical cancer screening (), as did the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) (). Subsequently, in 2015, ASCCP and the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) issued interim guidance for the use of a human papillomavirus (HPV) test for primary screening for cervical cancer that was approved in 2014 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (). The purpose of this document is to provide a review of the best available evidence regarding the prevention and early detection of cervical cancer.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/aog.0000000000001263

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2016-01
Volume
127
Issue
1
Pages
e1-e20
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/aog.0000000000001263
OpenAlex
W4254573998
Cited by
118
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 13
FWCI
14.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
Keywords
cervical cancer, cervical cancer screening, HPV testing, primary HPV testing, colposcopy, cervical cancer incidence and mortality, cancer prevention, early detection
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Carcinoma in Situ, Uterine Cervical Neoplasms, Cytological Techniques, Female, Humans, Evidence-Based Medicine, Papillomavirus Infections, Papillomavirus Vaccines, Early Detection of Cancer

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