The acceptability of vaginal smear self-collection for screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review

Página do item simplificado
dc.contributorSistema FMUSP-HC: Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (FMUSP) e Hospital das Clínicas da FMUSP
dc.contributor.authorBRAZ, Natalia Serrano Doratioto Faria
dc.contributor.authorLORENZI, Noely Paula Cristina
dc.contributor.authorSORPRESO, Isabel Cristina Esposito
dc.contributor.authorAGUIAR, Lana Maria de
dc.contributor.authorBARACAT, Edmund Chada
dc.contributor.authorSOARES-JUNIOR, Jose Maria
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-09T15:36:09Z
dc.date.available2017-06-09T15:36:09Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractCervical cancer is a major cause of death in adult women. However, many women do not undergo cervical cancer screening for the following reasons: fear, shame, physical limitations, cultural or religious considerations and lack of access to health care services. Self-collected vaginal smears maybe an alternative means of including more women in cervical cancer screening programs. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the acceptability of vaginal smear self-collection for cervical cancer screening. We selected articles from PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase that were published between January 1995 and April 2016. Studies written in English, French, Italian, Portuguese or Spanish that involved women between 18 and 69 years of age who had engaged in sexual intercourse were included in this review. The review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Nineteen studies were ultimately evaluated in this review. Most of the included studies (n=17) demonstrated that the self-collection method exhibited outstanding acceptability among women with respect to cervical cancer screening, and only two studies indicated that self-collection exhibited low acceptability among women in this context. The acceptability of self-collection was determined subjectively (without standardized questionnaires) in 10 studies (53%) and via structured and validated questionnaires in the remaining studies. The results of our review suggest that the self-collection method is well-accepted and may therefore encourage greater participation in cervical cancer screening programs. However, additional studies are required to verify these results.
dc.description.indexMEDLINE
dc.identifier.citationCLINICS, v.72, n.3, p.183-187, 2017
dc.identifier.doi10.6061/clinics/2017(03)09
dc.identifier.eissn1980-5322
dc.identifier.issn1807-5932
dc.identifier.urihttps://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/20112
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherHOSPITAL CLINICAS, UNIV SAO PAULO
dc.relation.ispartofClinics
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.rights.holderCopyright HOSPITAL CLINICAS, UNIV SAO PAULO
dc.subjectCervical Cancer
dc.subjectVaginal Smear Self-Collection
dc.subjectCancer Screening
dc.subjectMethod Acceptance
dc.subjectSystematic Review
dc.subject.otherrandomized controlled-trial
dc.subject.otherus-mexico border
dc.subject.otherbrazilian women
dc.subject.otherhpv
dc.subject.otherpopulation
dc.subject.otherinfection
dc.subject.otherspecimens
dc.subject.otherintervention
dc.subject.otheraustralia
dc.subject.otherattitudes
dc.subject.wosMedicine, General & Internal
dc.titleThe acceptability of vaginal smear self-collection for screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review
dc.typearticle
dc.type.categoryreview
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dspace.entity.typePublication
hcfmusp.citation.scopus30
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcNATALIA DORATIOTO SERRANO FARIA BRAZ
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcNOELY PAULA CRISTINA LORENZI
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcISABEL CRISTINA ESPOSITO SORPRESO
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcLANA MARIA DE AGUIAR
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcEDMUND CHADA BARACAT
hcfmusp.contributor.author-fmusphcJOSE MARIA SOARES JUNIOR
hcfmusp.description.beginpage183
hcfmusp.description.endpage187
hcfmusp.description.issue3
hcfmusp.description.volume72
hcfmusp.origemWOS
hcfmusp.origem.pubmed28355365
hcfmusp.origem.scieloSCIELO:S1807-59322017000300183
hcfmusp.origem.scopus2-s2.0-85016124032
hcfmusp.origem.wosWOS:000397874900009
hcfmusp.publisher.citySAO PAULO
hcfmusp.publisher.countryBRAZIL
hcfmusp.relation.referenceAllgar VL, 2005, BRIT J CANCER, V92, P1959, DOI 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602587
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBoggan JC, 2015, SEX TRANSM DIS, V42, P655, DOI 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000345
hcfmusp.relation.referenceBroquet C, 2015, AFR HEALTH SCI, V15, P755, DOI 10.4314/ahs.v15i3.8
hcfmusp.relation.referenceCerigo H, 2012, J MED SCREEN, V19, P42, DOI 10.1258/jms.2012.012011
hcfmusp.relation.referenceCrofts Victoria, 2015, Int J Womens Health, V7, P149, DOI 10.2147/IJWH.S56307
hcfmusp.relation.referenceDareng EO, 2015, PLOS ONE, V10, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0141679
hcfmusp.relation.referenceEmery JD, 2013, FAM PRACT, V30, P294, DOI 10.1093/fampra/cms087
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSorpreso ICE, 2012, CLIMACTERIC, V15, P573, DOI 10.3109/13697137.2011.635915
hcfmusp.relation.referenceFargnoli Vanessa, 2015, Int J Womens Health, V7, P883, DOI 10.2147/IJWH.S90772
hcfmusp.relation.referenceFielder RL, 2013, J AM COLL HEALTH, V61, P46, DOI 10.1080/07448481.2012.750610
hcfmusp.relation.referenceJun JK, 2016, J CLIN VIROL, V79, P80, DOI 10.1016/j.jcv.2016.04.012
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMitchell S, 2011, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V114, P111, DOI 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.01.028
hcfmusp.relation.referenceMoher D, 2009, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V339, DOI 10.1136/bmj.b2535
hcfmusp.relation.referenceOrtiz AP, 2012, P R HEALTH SCI J, V31, P205
hcfmusp.relation.referencePenaranda E, 2015, J LOW GENIT TRACT DI, V19, P323, DOI 10.1097/LGT.0000000000000134
hcfmusp.relation.referencePenaranda E, 2014, SOUTH MED J, V107, P426, DOI 10.14423/SMJ.0000000000000132
hcfmusp.relation.referenceQuincy BL, 2012, J OBSTET GYNAECOL, V32, P87, DOI 10.3109/01443615.2011.625456
hcfmusp.relation.referenceRacey CS, 2016, J WOMENS HEALTH, V25, P489, DOI 10.1089/jwh.2015.5348
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSorpreso ICE, 2010, CLIN EXP OBSTET GYN, V37, P283
hcfmusp.relation.referenceStanczuk G, 2016, BMJ OPEN, V6, DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010660
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSultana F, 2015, BMC CANCER, V15, DOI 10.1186/s12885-015-1804-x
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSultana F, 2015, SEX HEALTH, V12, P279, DOI 10.1071/SH14236
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSultana F, 2014, BMC CANCER, V14, DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-14-207
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSzarewski A, 2011, BRIT J CANCER, V104, P915, DOI 10.1038/bjc.2011.48
hcfmusp.relation.referenceSzarewski A, 2009, J MED SCREEN, V16, P193, DOI 10.1258/jms.2009.009069
hcfmusp.relation.referenceTranberg M, 2015, BMC PUBLIC HEALTH, V15, DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2039-0
hcfmusp.relation.referenceVanderpool RC, 2014, GYNECOL ONCOL, V132, pS21, DOI 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.10.008
hcfmusp.relation.referenceWong ELY, 2016, CANCER NURS, V39, pE1, DOI 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000241
hcfmusp.scopus.lastupdate2024-05-17
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationfdddb30b-f697-4bdf-b47f-e76b935d0488
relation.isAuthorOfPublication2fbce2b1-33d6-4bca-8336-5571af689a21
relation.isAuthorOfPublication711c3a2f-978d-4088-80df-529d13bf9fd7
relation.isAuthorOfPublication9bcfe499-868d-4348-aea0-8c898746b2de
relation.isAuthorOfPublication27af1fa4-ab33-4cdc-b80d-16dd66b6ac76
relation.isAuthorOfPublication97160a48-cbb6-4137-9478-b35b77066d37
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryfdddb30b-f697-4bdf-b47f-e76b935d0488
Arquivos
Pacote Original
Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
Imagem de Miniatura
Nome:
art_BRAZ_The_acceptability_of_vaginal_smear_selfcollection_for_screening_2017.PDF
Tamanho:
983.03 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descrição:
publishedVersion (English)
Baixar
Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - FM/MOG
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICHC
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/58
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/03
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - ODS/10