2013
DOI: 10.4172/2155-6113.s3-004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Low Prevalence of Cervical Cancer Screening Among HIV-Positive Women in Catalonia (Spain)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

2
5
5

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
5
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar to the present study, the prevalence of LSIL ranged from 6.4 to 13% in studies by other authors [3, 15, 16, 20]. One case of LSIL was noted in the HIV-negative control group.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar to the present study, the prevalence of LSIL ranged from 6.4 to 13% in studies by other authors [3, 15, 16, 20]. One case of LSIL was noted in the HIV-negative control group.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…In a study by Ghebre et al [19], the majority of the cases had ASCUS, whereas in the present study the majority of the abnormalities were HSIL. Three cases of ASC-H (16.66%) and 1 (5.55%) case of ASCUS was found in the present study, which was similar to other studies where authors reported ASCUS findings in the range of 0.7–7.9% [3, 16, 20]. In contrast to the present study, 17 cases (22%) were reported as ASCUS in a study by Paramsothy et al [17].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 57%
“…However, this finding is lower than the study findings in Canada [24] 58%, England [25] 85.7%, Catalonia [26] 50.6%, and Kenya [27] 46%. The possible reason for this variation could be due to differences in socio-demographic and economic status of the study respondents as well as the countries’ promotional policy variations.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 74%
“…Accordingly, the pooled prevalence of cervical cancer screening was 13.46% (95%CI: 11.06, 15.86). The result is lower than the study findings in Canada 58% [46], England 85.7% [47], Catalonia 50.6% [48], and Kenya 46% [49]. The possible reason for this variation could be due to differences in sociodemographic and economic status of the study respondents as well as the countries' health policy variations like institutional framework to promote screening, which could have largely succeeded in implementing successful programs regarding cervical cancer screening.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 62%