MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2594595843 · doi:10.1158/1538-7755.disp16-c64

Abstract C64: Use of HPV self-sampling to increase screening for cervical cancer in indigenous and rural communities in Guatemala

2017· article· en· W2594595843 sur OpenAlexaff
Anna Gottschlich, Audrey R. Murchland, Kristin Bevilacqua, Andrés M. Pineda, Alvaro Rivera‐Andrade, Christian S. Álvarez, Gina Ogilvie, Carlos Mendoza-Montano, Rafael Meza

Notice bibliographique

RevueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésIndigenousCervical cancerPapanicolaou stainMedicineDemographyRural areaCancer screeningPap testDeveloping countryCervical screeningCancerEnvironmental healthCervical cancer screeningEconomic growth

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND: Incidence and mortality rates of cervical cancer in Guatemala, as well as many other low- and middle-income countries, are considerably higher than rates in high-income countries. This is most likely due to low rates of cervical cancer screening in these countries, specifically in indigenous and rural populations. Current estimates suggest that less than 40% of women in Guatemala have ever been screened for cervical cancer, with much lower rates in indigenous and rural communities. We therefore proposed that reliance on Papanicolaou (Pap) and visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) screening are not the most effective methods for controlling and preventing cervical cancer in indigenous and rural communities in Guatemala. Thus we investigated self-collection HPV tests as an alternative primary method of screening. HPV testing can be administered by a woman herself in the privacy of her home, thus mitigating issues of accessibility and privacy, which we believe to be barriers to screening experienced by women in these populations. We hypothesize that an HPV test will increase rates of follow-up care (Paps/VIAs) in these communities. Our prior study showed that HPV testing was highly acceptable in one indigenous group in Guatemala, and this study aims to expand upon those results to determine whether these tests are acceptable in other populations, and if there is an increase in follow-up care after use of these tests. METHODS: A randomly selected group of women (N=1000), ages 18-60, residing in two rural communities (Santiago Atitlan, which is approximately 70 kilometers outside of Guatemala City, and Livingston, which is on the Caribbean coast) will be surveyed June-July 2016 to assess risk factors and knowledge of HPV and cervical cancer. Eligible women (ages 25-56 who are not menstruating or pregnant and have not had a hysterectomy) will be asked to self-collect a vaginal sample to be tested for HPV to assess the prevalence in each community, as well as the acceptability of HPV self-sampling as an option for cervical cancer screening. We have seen that HPV testing is acceptable in Santiago, but are interested to see if the test is acceptable in other populations with different ethnic backgrounds. Women will be given their results from the HPV test within a month after data collection and then be contacted 6 months and 1 year after to determine if they followed-up on their results. RESULTS/FINDINGS: In our pilot study, 93% of women in Santiago were interested in providing a sample and 88% were eligible, showing that the test was highly acceptable in this community. We expect to see similar rates of acceptability in this follow-up study, however this study will be performed in different communities, with varying ethnic compositions, which could alter these rates. Additionally, in our pilot study, 21% of women tested positive for HPV, with 17% testing positive for high risk HPV. We again expect similar results for rates of HPV, but this could differ between communities. We will assess baseline rates of Pap/VIA screening in our surveys and hope to see increased rates of follow-up screening among women who have tested positive for HPV when we contact them at the 6-month and 1-year mark. We may also see increased rates of follow-up care in women who tested negative for HPV, as they have now been exposed to education and information about cervical cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Self-collection HPV testing appears to be an acceptable form of cervical cancer screening in at least one, if not more, indigenous and rural communities in Guatemala. This study will help determine if HPV testing increases the rate at which women receive Pap/VIA screening after receiving their HPV test result. With increased screening for cervical cancer in these communities, the incidence and mortality rates of this disease could be greatly reduced. **Data collection will conclude in August and all results will be analyzed prior to this conference. Citation Format: Anna Gottschlich, Audrey Murchland, Kristin Bevilacqua, Andres Pineda, Alvaro Rivera-Andrade, Christian Alvarez, Gina Ogilvie, Carlos Mendoza-Montano, Rafael Meza. Use of HPV self-sampling to increase screening for cervical cancer in indigenous and rural communities in Guatemala. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Ninth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2016 Sep 25-28; Fort Lauderdale, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2017;26(2 Suppl):Abstract nr C64.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,088
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,175

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,214
Tête enseignante GPT0,472
Écart entre enseignants0,258 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionMême sujetCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchTravaux en français237 207