Evaluation of cervical cytology
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Record ID 32002000324
This report compares new technologies for cervical cytological screening with conventional Papanicolaou (Pap) test screening in terms of diagnostic accuracy, costs, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness in adult women of average cervical cancer risk.
Authors' recommendations: Estimates of the sensitivity of the conventional Pap test are biased in most studies; based on the least biased studies, sensitivity is near 50 percent, much lower than generally believed. Newer technologies improve sensitivity compared with conventional Pap screening; however, there are no precise estimates for their effect on specificity. Under assumptions favorable to improved initial screening technologies and rescreening technologies, either approach can result in acceptable cost per life-year saved at 3-year Pap screening intervals. However, the imprecision in estimates of effectiveness and cost of the new technologies makes drawing firm conclusions about their relative cost-effectiveness problematic.
Authors' methods: Systematic review
Project Status: Completed
URL for project: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/cervsumm.htm
Year Published: 1999
English language abstract: An English language summary is available
Publication Type: Not Assigned
Country: United States
- Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures
- Mass Screening
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
- Vaginal Smears
Organisation Name: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
Contact Address: Center for Outcomes and Evidence Technology Assessment Program, 540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850, USA. Tel: +1 301 427 1610; Fax: +1 301 427 1639;
Contact Name: firstname.lastname@example.org
Contact Email: email@example.com
Copyright: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.