The costs of reducing loss to follow-up in South African cervical cancer screening

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation

Volumn 3, Issue , 2005, Pages

  Goldhaber Fiebert, Jeremy D ^a   Denny, Lynette E ^b   De Souza, Michelle ^b   Wright Jr , Thomas C ^c   Kuhn, Louise ^d   Goldie, Sue J ^a  

^a Harvard Initiative for Global Health   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN   (South Africa)

^c Columbia University ^*  (United States)

^d Taub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain and the Gertrude H Sergievsky Center   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER SCREENING; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; POPULATION DISTRIBUTION; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOUTH AFRICA; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

EID: 28044456959     PISSN: 14787547     EISSN: 14787547     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1478-7547-3-11     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Ferlay J, Bray F, Pisani P, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2000: Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide, Version 1.0. IARC CancerBase No. 5. Lyon, IARCPress, 2001.
2. Bosch FX, Lorincz A, Munoz N, Meijer CJLM, Shah KV. The causal relationship between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer. J Clin Pathol. 2002;55:244-265.
3. Ponten J, Adami HO, Bergstrom R, Dillner J, Friberg LG, et al. Strategies for global control of cervical cancer. Int J Cancer. 1995;60:1-26.
4. Cuzick J, Szarewski A, Cubie H, Hulman G, Kitchener H, Luesley D, McGoogan E, Menon U, Terry G, Edwards R, Brooks C, Desai M, Gie C, Ho L, Jacobs I, Pickles C, Sasieni P. Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human papillomavirus: the HART study. Lancet. 2003;362:1871-6.
5. Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D, Moscicki AB, Smith RA, Eyre HJ, Cohen C; American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2002;52(6):342-62.
6. Sankaranarayanan R, Budukh AM, Rajkumar R. Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low- and middle-income developing countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2001;79:954-62.
7. Franco EL. Primary screening of cervical cancer with human papillomavirus tests. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2003;31:89-96.
8. Wright TC Jr. Cervical cancer screening using visualization techniques. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2003;31:66-71.
9. Denny L, Kuhn, L, De Souza, M, Pollack, AE, Dupree, W, Wright, TC. Screen-and-Treat Approaches for Cervical Cancer Prevention in Low-Resource Settings. JAMA. 2005;294:2173-81.
10. Gaffikin L, Blumenthal PD, Emerson M, Limpaphayom K; Royal Thai College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RTCOG)/JHPIEGOfs Corporation Cervical Cancer Prevention Group. Safety, acceptability, and feasibility of a single-visit approach to cervical-cancer prevention in rural Thailand: a demonstration project. Lancet. 2003;361:814-20.
11. Denny L, Kuhn L, Risi L, Richart RM, Pollack A, Lorincz A, et al. Two-stage cervical cancer screening: an alternative for resource-poor settings. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:383-8.
12. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Gaffikin L, Limpahayom KK, Lumbiganon P, Warakamin S, et al. Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1469-83.
13. Goldie SJ, Kuhn L, Denny L, Pollack A, Wright TC. Policy analysis of cervical cancer screening strategies in low-resource settings: clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness. JAMA. 2001;285:3107-15.
14. Goldie SJ, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Kim JJ. Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Cancer Screening in Kenya, India, Peru, South Africa, and Thailand. Presented to the Society for Medical Decision Making. October, 2004.
15. Thinkhamrop J, Lumbiganon P, Jitpakdeebodin S. Loss to follow-up of patients with abnormal Pap smear: magnitude and reasons. J Med Assoc Thai. 1998;81:862-5.
16. Sankaranarayanan R, Rajkumar R, Theresa R, Esmy PO, Mahe C, Bagyalakshmi KR, et al. Initial results from a randomized trial of cervical visual screening in rural south India. Int J Cancer. 2004;109:461-7.
17. Cronje HS. Screening for cervical cancer in developing countries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2004;84:101-8.
18. Cronje HS, Parham GP, Cooreman BF, de Beer A, Divall P, Bam RH. A comparison of four screening methods for cervical neoplasia in a developing country. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 188:395-400.
19. Cronje HS, Trumpelmann MD, Divall PD, Scott LL, Middlecote BD, De Wet JI. Cervical cytological services in the Orange Free State. Demographic characteristics. S Afr Med J. 1989;76:615-8.
20. Doh AS, Nkele NN, Achu P, Essimbi F, Essame O, Nkegoum B. Visual inspection with acetic acid and cytology as screening methods for cervical lesions in Cameroon. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005;89:167-73.
21. University of Zimbabwe/JHPIEGO Cervical Cancer Project. Visual inspection with acetic acid for cervical cancer screening: test qualities in a primary care setting. Lancet. 1999;353:869-73.
22. Kuhn L, Denny L, Pollack A, Lorincz A, Richart RM, Wright TC. Human papillomavirus DNA testing for cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:818-25.
23. Denny L, Kuhn L, Pollack A, Wright TC Jr. Direct visual inspection for cervical cancer screening: an analysis of factors influencing test performance. Cancer. 2002;94:1699-707.
24. Michael Drummond, Bernard O'Brien, Greg Stoddart, George Torrance, M. F. Drummond (Editor). Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programs. 2nd ed. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
25. Marthe R. Gold, Joanna E. Siegel, Louise B. Russell and Milton C. Weinstein (eds.) Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
26. EIU Country Data. Economist Intelligence Unit. London. http://www.eiu.com/ (Accessed: February 9, 2005).