The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
2012 Updated Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors
Abstract
A group of 47 experts representing 23 professional societies, national and international health organizations, and federal agencies met in Bethesda, MD, September 14-15, 2012, to revise the 2006 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology Consensus Guidelines. The group's goal was to provide revised evidence-based consensus guidelines for managing women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) following adoption of cervical cancer screening guidelines incorporating longer screening intervals and co-testing. In addition to literature review, data from almost 1.4 million women in the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Medical Care Plan provided evidence on risk after abnormal tests. Where data were available, guidelines prescribed similar management for women with similar risks for CIN 3, AIS, and cancer. Most prior guidelines were reaffirmed. Examples of updates include: Human papillomavirus-negative atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance results are followed with co-testing at 3 years before return to routine screening and are not sufficient for exiting women from screening at age 65 years; women aged 21-24 years need less invasive management, especially for minor abnormalities; postcolposcopy management strategies incorporate co-testing; endocervical sampling reported as CIN 1 should be managed as CIN 1; unsatisfactory cytology should be repeated in most circumstances, even when HPV results from co-testing are known, while most cases of negative cytology with absent or insufficient endocervical cells or transformation zone component can be managed without intensive follow-up.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
The 2001 Bethesda System<SUBTITLE>Terminology for Reporting Results of Cervical Cytology</SUBTITLE>
Solomon, D. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.16.2114 · Cited by 3,104
Self-citationSaslow, D., Solomon, D., Lawson, H. W., Killackey, M., Kulasingam, S. L., Cain, J., Garcia, F. A. R., Moriarty, A. T., Waxman, A. G., Wilbur, D. C., et al. (2012) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21139 · Cited by 1,390
Self-citationNATURAL HISTORY OF CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA
RICHART, R. M. (1967) · Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1097/00003081-196712000-00002 · Cited by 1,376
Natural History of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: A Critical Review
Östör, A. G. (1993) · International Journal of Gynecological Pathology · doi:10.1097/00004347-199304000-00018 · Cited by 1,260
2001 Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women With Cervical Cytological Abnormalities
Wright, Jr. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.287.16.2120 · Cited by 1,215
Screening for cervical cancer: U.S. preventive services Task force recommendation statement
Moyer, V. A., & on behalf of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force* (2012) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-156-12-201206190-00424 · Cited by 1,049
Winer, R. L. (2003) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwf180 · Cited by 1,044
Natural History of Dysplasia of the Uterine Cervix
Holowaty, P., Miller, A. B., Rohan, T., & To, T. (1999) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/91.3.252 · Cited by 608
Katki, H. A., Kinney, W. K., Fetterman, B., Lorey, T., Poitras, N. E., Cheung, L., Demuth, F., Schiffman, M., Wacholder, S., & Castle, P. E. (2011) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70145-0 · Cited by 570
Self-citation(2003) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(03)00418-6 · Cited by 562
Cited by
Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines, 2010
(2011) · Annals of Emergency Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.04.006 · Cited by 2,076
The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology: Definitions, Criteria, and Explanatory Notes
(2015) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11074-5 · Cited by 801
Smith, R. A., Andrews, K. S., Brooks, D., Fedewa, S. A., Manassaram‐Baptiste, D., Saslow, D., Brawley, O. W., & Wender, R. C. (2017) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21392 · Cited by 719
Miller, J. M., Binnicker, M. J., Campbell, S., Carroll, K. C., Chapin, K. C., Gilligan, P. H., Gonzalez, M. D., Jerris, R. C., Kehl, S. C., Patel, R., et al. (2018) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1093/cid/ciy381 · Cited by 641
Cervical Cancer Screening: Past, Present, and Future
Bedell, S. L., Goldstein, L. S., Goldstein, A. R., & Goldstein, A. T. (2020) · Sexual Medicine Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.sxmr.2019.09.005 · Cited by 500
Metadata
- Authors
- Massad, L. S., Einstein, M. H., Huh, W. K., Katki, H. A., Kinney, W. K., Schiffman, M., Solomon, D., Wentzensen, N., & Lawson, H. W.
- Venue
- Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease
- Published
- 2013-04
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- Supplement 1
- Pages
- S1-S27
- ISSN
- 1089-2591 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3153143002
- Cited by
- 730
- References
- 70
- FWCI
- 49.29
- 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: 2012 Updated Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/lgt.0b013e318287d329
- The paper
- Massad, L. S., Einstein, M. H., Huh, W. K., Katki, H. A., Kinney, W. K., Schiffman, M., Solomon, D., Wentzensen, N., & Lawson, H. W. (2013). 2012 Updated Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Tests and Cancer Precursors. Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease. https://doi.org/10.1097/lgt.0b013e318287d329
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.