Karisani N, Aminimoghaddam S, Kashanian M, Baradaran HR, Moradi Y. Diagnostic accuracy for alternative cervical cancer screening strategies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Health Care Women Int 2022;
45:323-362. [PMID:
35084291 DOI:
10.1080/07399332.2021.1998059]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2020] [Accepted: 10/21/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of screening cervical cancer tests as alternative standalone methods. The combined estimates of sensitivity of visual inspection with acetic acid, visual inspection with lugol's iodine, conventional pap smear, liquid-based cytology, High risk HPV testing by clinician, High risk HPV testing by self- sampling, cervicography were 64%, 80%, 55%, 70%, 70% and 67% respectively; the combine values of specificity of these screening strategies were 88%, 88%, 96%, 59%, 94%, and 95% respectively. Our findings draw attention to an attractive opinion to facilitate the collection of specimens for DNA HPV by patients in settings where they don't have access to a regular screening programs.
Collapse