Evidence mapPaperPMID 36471770Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2023

Clinician practices, knowledge, and attitudes regarding primary human papillomavirus testing for cervical cancer screening: A mixed-methods study in Indiana.

Natalia M Rodriguez, Luke P Brennan, Layla Claure, Lara N Balian, Monica L Kasting, Victoria L Champion, Michele R Forman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Natalia M RodriguezDepartment of Public Health, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Luke P BrennanWeldon School of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Layla ClaureDepartment of Public Health, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Lara N BalianDepartment of Public Health, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Monica L KastingDepartment of Public Health, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Victoria L ChampionIndiana University Simon Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Michele R FormanFormerly at Department of Nutrition Science, College of Health and Human Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Purdue University West Lafayette · USIndiana University Health · USIndiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Comprehensive Cancer CenterIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · US

Funding

Science CoreP20GM121176 · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · 2025 to 2025
$2.2M
NCI NIH HHS K01 CA241073NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM121176NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM077229
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing, in which a high-risk HPV test is administered without cytology, was first included in 2018 US cervical cancer screening guidelines. Subsequent guidelines endorsed primary HPV testing as the preferred method for cervical cancer screening following evidence of its clinical and economic benefits, although many sources still indicate it as an option along with cytology and HPV/Pap co-testing. Primary HPV testing could be key to improving the declining cervical cancer screening rates in the US; however its adoption has been slow as clinicians are hesitant to make the change. Indiana ranks in the top ten states for cervical cancer mortality, with marked race-ethnic disparities in cervical cancer screening and low HPV vaccination rates. To examine clinician practices, knowledge, and attitudes regarding primary HPV testing, in 2021 we conducted an online cross-sectional survey (n = 224) and in-depth interviews (n = 20) with Indiana clinicians practicing cervical cancer screening. Only 3 % reported using primary HPV testing for eligible patients, and only 50 % were willing to adopt it as the preferred cervical cancer screening method for the recommended patient group. In a multivariable logistic regression model, knowledge of the effectiveness (aOR 2.58 [1.41-4.72]) and perceived benefit (aOR 7.35 [3.65-14.81]) of primary HPV testing predicted willingness to adopt. In-depth interviews revealed knowledge gaps, uncertainty, and perceived limitations of this method as the reasons for limited uptake of primary HPV testing. Targeted messages about the benefits and effectiveness may enhance clinician knowledge, acceptance, and adoption.

Indexed as

Cervical cancerCliniciansHuman papillomavirusMixed-methodsPrimary HPV testingScreening

Identifiers

PMID36471770
PMCPMC9719026
OpenAlexW4310779664

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.