4.5 Article

Decreasing cervical cancer mortality in Mexico: Effect of Papanicolaou coverage, birthrate and the importance of diagnostic validity of cytology

期刊

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION
卷 17, 期 10, 页码 2808-2817

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2659

关键词

-

资金

  1. CONACyT [SALUD-2004-C02-9]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The reduction in cervical cancer mortality in developed countries has been attributed to well-organized, population-based prevention and control programs that incorporate screening with the Papanicolaou (Pap) smear. In Mexico, there has been a decrease in cervical cancer mortality, but it is unclear what factors have prompted this reduction. Methods: Using data from national indicators, we determined the correlation between cervical cancer mortality rates and Pap coverage, birthrate, and gross national product, using a linear regression model. We determined relative risk of dying of cervical cancer according to place of residence (rural/urban, region) using a Poisson model. We also estimated Pap smear coverage using national survey data and evaluated the validity and reproducibility of Pap smear diagnosis. Results: An increase in Pap coverage (beta = -0.069) and a decrease in birthrate (beta = 0.054) correlate with decreasing cervical cancer mortality in Mexico. Self-reported Pap smear rates in the last 12 months vary from 27.4% to 48.1%. Women who live in the central (relative risk, 1.04) and especially the southern (relative risk, 1.47) parts of Mexico have a greater relative risk of dying of cervical cancer than those who live in the north. There is a high incidence of false negatives in cervical cytology laboratories in Mexico; the percentage of false negatives varies from 3.33% to 53.13%. Conclusions: The decrease in cervical cancer mortality observed in Mexico is proportional to increasing Pap coverage and decreasing birthrate. Accreditation of cervical cytology laboratories is needed to improve diagnostic precision.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据