Seguimiento a mujeres con hallazgos anormales en el tamizaje de cáncer de cuello uterino en la región de las Américas: protocolo de una revisión sistemática
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4656-6064
Mauricio Maza
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2027-4431
Silvana Luciani
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3122-1258
Raúl Murillo
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7187-9946
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
The Americas region ranks third in the world in incidence and mortality from cervical cancer among World Health Organization (WHO) regions. Several studies analyze screening coverage and accuracy of screening tests as the main reasons for lack of effectiveness; however, reports on follow-up of positive-screened women are scarce. Aim: To synthesize the existing knowledge about compliance with follow-up recommendations after an abnormal result of cervical cancer screening. Methods: We will search the PubMed via Medline and LILACS databases, with additional searches of grey literature. Inclusion criteria comprise studies on adult women from the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) affiliated countries, with full text available and with specified data on follow-up outcomes. There are no language or publication date restrictions. Studies on special populations or including only women under age 25 will be excluded. Two reviewers will screen titles and abstracts independently, and two researchers will assess the methodological quality and risk of bias by using validated tools according to type of study. Disagreements will be solved by consensus. Discussion: This systematic review will provide information on differences and determinants of effective follow-up of positive-screened women in cervical cancer screening. The use of a Latin American database, the review of grey literature, and the inclusion of studies in all languages will allow us to identify more reports that might be relevant for low and middle income countries (LMIC) accounting with a high burden of disease.
Américas, neoplasias del cuello uterino, neoplasia intraepitelial cervical, tamizaje masivo, pérdida de seguimiento, estudios de seguimientoAmericas, uterine cervical neoplasms, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia, mass screening, lost to follow-up, follow-up studies
2. Murillo R, Herrero R, Sierra MS, Forman D. Cervical cancer in Central and South America: Burden of disease and status of disease control. Cancer Epidemiol. 2016 Sep;44:S121–30.
3. Singh G. Global Inequalities in Cervical Cancer Incidence and Mortality are Linked to Deprivation, Low Socioeconomic Status, and Human Development. Int. J. MCH AIDS. 2012;1(1).
4. Murillo R, Almonte M, Pereira A, Ferrer E, Gamboa OA, Jerónimo J, et al. Cervical cancer screening programs in Latin America and the Caribbean. Vaccine. 2008 Aug 19;26 Suppl 11:L37-48.
5. Devarapalli P, Labani S, Nagarjuna N, Panchal P, Asthana S. Barriers affecting uptake of cervical cancer screening in low and middle income countries: A systematic review. Indian J Cancer. 2018;55(4):318.
6. Majid U, Kandasamy S, Farrah K, Vanstone M. Women’s preferences and experiences of cervical cancer screening in rural and remote areas: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis. Rural Remote Health. 2019;19(4):5190.
7. Rees I, Jones D, Chen H, Macleod U. Interventions to improve the uptake of cervical cancer screening among lower socioeconomic groups: A systematic review. Prev Med. 2018 Jun;111:323–35.
8. Mann L, Foley KL, Tanner AE, Sun CJ, Rhodes SD. Increasing Cervical Cancer Screening Among US Hispanics/Latinas: A Qualitative Systematic Review. J Cancer Educ. 2015 Jun;30(2):374–87.
9. Mustafa RA, Santesso N, Khatib R, Mustafa AA, Wiercioch W, Kehar R, et al. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the accuracy of HPV tests, visual inspection with acetic acid, cytology, and colposcopy. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2016 Mar;132(3):259–65.
10. PAHO. Pan American Health Orgnization: Member States [Internet]. [cited 2021 Sept 16]. Available from: https://www.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=103:member-states&Itemid=1110&lang=fr
11. Pan American Health Organization. Plan of Action for the prevention and control of HIV and sexually transmitted infections 2016-2021. WHO; 2016. [Internet]. [cited 2021 Sept 16]. Available from: https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/34081.
12. Pan American Health Organization. Plan of action for cervical cancer prevention and control 2018-2030 [Internet]. PAHO; 2018. [cited 2021 Sept 16]. Available from: https://www.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_docman&view=download&category_slug=mandates-strategies-3448&alias=47584-plan-cervical-cancer-2018-2030&Itemid=270&lang=en
13. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009 Dec 4;339(jul21 1):b2700–b2700.
14. Downes MJ, Brennan ML, Williams HC, Dean RS. Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS). BMJ Open. 2016 Dec;6(12):e011458.
15. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Critical appraisal notes and checklists [Internet]. [cited 2021 Sept 16]. Available from: https://www.sign.ac.uk/checklists-and-notes
16. de Sanjose S, Holme F. What is needed now for successful scale-up of screening? Papillomavirus Res. 2019 Jun;7:173–5.
17. World Health Organization. Draft: Global Strategy Towards the Elimination of Cervical Cancer as a Public Health Program. [Internet]. 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/draft-global-strategy-towards-eliminating-cervical-cancer-as-a-public-health-problem
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.