Table 1.
Characteristics of studies included in this review
| First Author |
Ye ar |
Durat ion of study |
Commun ity |
Location | Age range |
Screen ing tests |
Screening conducted by |
Num ber of scree ned wome n |
Refere nce standar d |
Sensitivity | Specificity | Screen positivit y |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cross Sectional Studies[5, 6, 9, 10, 17–21, 24–31]
| ||||||||||||
| Sankaranarayanan et al.[17] | 1998 | 2 years | Unclear | Thiruvanathapuram (KL) | Not Reported | VIA, Cytology | Cytotechnicians | 3000 | Not Reported | Not Reported | ~92.2% | 9.93% |
| Basu et al.[6] | 2003 | 2 years 6 months | Urban | Kolkata (WB) | 30 – 64 years | VIA, VIAM, Cytology | Female Health Workers | 5843 | Histology & Colposcopy | CIN II+: 55.7% | CIN II+: 82.1% | 18.70% |
| Sankaranarayanan et al.[18] | 2003 | 3 years | Unclear | Thiruvanathapuram (KL) | 25 – 65 years | VIA, VILI, Cytology | Female Health Workers | 4444 | Histology & Colposcopy | CIN II+: 82.6% | CIN II+: 86.5% | HT: 15.8% |
| Sankaranarayanan et al.[19] | 2004a | 5 years | Urban & Rural | Kolkata (WB), Jaipur (RJ), Mumbai (MH), Thiruvanathapuram (KL) | 25 – 65 years | VIA, VILI | Female Health Workers, Nurses, Cytotechnicians | 31,154 | Histology & Colposcopy | HSIL: 73% | HSIL: 84.8% | 16.20% |
| Sankaranarayanan et al.[20] | 2004b | 4 years | Urban | Kolkata (WB) & Mumbai (MH) | 25 – 65 years | VIA, VIAM | Female Health Workers | 18,675 | Histology & Colposcopy | HSIL: 60.3% | HSIL: 86.8% | 14.10% |
| Basu et al.[9] | 2006 | 1 year | Rural | Kolkata (WB) | 30 – 65 years | VIA | Female Health Workers | 2184 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 11.30% |
| Kamal et al.[21] | 2007 | 7 years | Urban | Nagpur (MH) | *Repoductive age group | VIA, Cytology | Multipurpose Health workers | 1347 | Colposcopy | Colpo + : 29.6% | Colpo +: 92.1% | 12.00% |
| Rural | 2392 | Colposcopy | Colpo + : 26.2% | Colpo +: 88% | 16% | |||||||
| Bhatla et al.[5] | 2009 | 1 year 6 months | Rural | Faridabad (HR) | 25 – 59 years | VIA, VILI, Cytology | Female Health Workers | 3000 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 14.20% |
| Gravitt et al.[24] | 2010 | 2 years 6 months | Rural | Medchal (AP) | > 25 years | VIA, Cytology, HPV DNA | Gynecologists | 2331 | Histology | CIN II+: 16.65% CIN III+: 31.56% | CIN II+: 87.36% CIN III+: 87.45% | 12.90% |
| Kumar et al.[10] | 2011 | 5 months | Urban | Mumbai (MH) | 30 – 65 years | VIA, VILI, CBE, OVE | Primary Health Workers | 182 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported |
| Deodhar et al.[25] | 2012 | 10 months | Rural | Solapur (MH) | 30 – 49 years | VIA, VIL, Cytology | Nurses | 5648 | Histology | CIN II+: 64.5% | CIN II: 84.2% | 16.90% |
| Basu et al.[26] | 2013 | i) 4 years ii) 2 years ii) 2 years | Rural | Kolkata (WB) | 30 – 65 years | VIA, HC2 | Female Health Workers | 35,308 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 1.37% |
| Jeronimo et al.[27] | 2014 | Unclear | Urban & Rural | Dadri (UP) & Hyderabad (AP) | 30 – 59 years 30 – 49 years | VIA, Cytology , CareHPV (Self collected), CareHPV (Physician collected) | Unclear | 4925 | Histology | CIN II+: 21.9% CIN III+: 7.69 | CIN II+: 94.6 CIN III+: 94.5% | 5.00% |
| Ghosh et al.[31] | 2014 | 3 years | Unclear | Kolkata (WB) | 30 – 60 years | VIA, HC2 | Female Health Worker | 30,773 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 7.50% |
| Satyanarayana et al.[28] | 2014 | 3 years | Rural | Dadri (UP) | 30 – 60 years | VIA, VILI, Cytology | Not described. | 4198 | Histology | CIN-II+: 54.5% CIN III+: 50.% | CIN II+: 96.8% III+: 96.7% | 9.70% |
| Basu et al.[29] | 2015 | 4 years 4 months | Rural | Kolkata (WB) | 30 – 60 years | VIA, HC2 | Female Health Workers | 39,740 | Histology & Colposcopy | CIN II+: 61.0%; CIN III: 59.9%; CIN III+: 67.9% | CIN II+: 93.4%; CIN III: 93.1%; CIN III+: 93.2% | 7.10% |
| Poli et al.[30] | 2015 | 7 years | Rural | Hyderabad (AP) | 26 – 60 years | VIA | Auxiliary Nurse Midwives | 18,869 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 10.75% |
|
| ||||||||||||
|
Randomized Control Trials[11, 22, 32]
| ||||||||||||
| Shastri et al.[32] | 2013 | 16 years | Urban | Mumbai (MH) | 35 – 64 years | VIA, CBE | Primary Health Workers | 67070 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 1.75 – 1.91% |
| Sankaranarayanan et al.[11] | 2007 | 3 years 6 months | Rural | Dindigul (TN) | 30 – 59 years | VIA | Nurses | 31,343 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 9.90% |
| Nene et al.[22] | 2007 | 4 years | Rural | Osmanabad (MH) | 30 – 59 years | VIA, Cytology, HPV DNA | Nurses | 26,755 | Not Reported | Not Reported | Not Reported | 14% |
*
VIA = Visual Inspection with Acetic Acid, VILI = Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine, VIAM = Visual Inspection with Acetic acid under Magnification, CBE = Clinical Breast Examination, OVE = Oral Visual Examination, UP = Uttar Pradesh, MH = Maharashtra, WB = West Bengal, HR = Haryana, AP = Andhra Pradesh, RJ = Rajasthan, KL = Kerala, TN = Tamil Nadu.