Nonattendance is still the main limitation for the effectiveness of screening for cervical cancer in the Netherlands

International Journal of Cancer

Volumn 119, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 2372-2375

  Bos, Anita B ^a   Rebolj, Matejka ^a   Habbema, J Dik F ^a   Van Ballegooijen, Marjolein ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Coverage; Invasive cervical cancer; Screening history

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SCREENING; FEMALE; HUMAN; NETHERLANDS; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCREENING TEST; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS;

EID: 33749641694     PISSN: 00207136     EISSN: 10970215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.22114     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. van Ballegooijen M, Bos AB, van den Akker ME, van Oortmarssen GJ, Boer R Meerding WJ, Habbema JDF. A first description of the screening practice in the Netherlands in 1994 based on data from PALGA (in Dutch). Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam, 1997.
2. van Ballegooijen M. Effects and costs of cervical cancer screening. Dissertation, Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam, 1998, chapter 6.
3. van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD. Epidemiological evidence for age-dependent regression of pre-invasive cervical cancer. Br J Cancer 1991;64:559-65.
4. Janerich DT, Hadjimichael O, Schwartz PE, Lowell DM, Meigs JW, Merino MJ, Flannery JT, Polednak AP. The screening histories of women with invasive cervical cancer, Connecticut. Am J Public Health 1995;85:762-3.
5. Mubiayi N, Bogaert E, Boman F, Leblanc E, Vinarier D, Leroy JL, Querleu D. Cytological history of 148 women presenting with invasive cervical cancer [Article in French]. Gynaecol Obstet Fertil 2002;30:210-17.
6. Sung HY, Keamey KA, Miller M, Kinney W, Samwaya GF, Hiatt RA. Papanicolaou smear history and diagnosis of invasive cervical cancer carcinoma. Cancer 2000;88:2283-9.
7. Womack C, Warren AY. Achievable laboratory standards; a review of cytology of 99 women with cervical cancer. Cytopathology 1998;9:171-7.
8. Stuart GC, Mc Gregor SE, Duggan MA, Nation JG. Review of the screening history of Alberta women with invasive cervical cancer. CMAJ 1997;157:513-19.
9. Ratima K, Paul C, Skegg DC. Cervical smear history of Maori women developing invasive cervical cancer. NZ Med J 1993;106:519-21.
10. Ciatto S, Grazzini G, Cecchini S, Iossa A. Screening history of incident cases of invasive carcinoma of the cervix. Tumori 1993;79:311-13.
11. Kenter GG, Schoonderwald EM, Koelma IA, Arentz N, Hermans J, Fleuren GJ. The cytological screening history of 469 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix uteri; does interval carcinoma exist? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1996;75:400-3.
12. Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Incidence of cancer in the Netherlands 1997. Utrecht: SIG Heath Care Information, 1997
13. PALGA. Dutch network and national database for pathology results of retrieval action on cervical cytology from 1977-1997. Utrecht: SIG/PALGA, 1997
14. van Akker-van Marie ME, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, Boer R, Habbema JD. Cost-effectivesness of cervical cancer screening: comparison of screening policies. JNCI 2002;94:193-204.
15. van Elven EH, Griffoen HP, Wiegman HP. Onderzoek knelpunten bevolkingsonderzoek baarmoederhalskanker (in dutch). KPMG 1990.
16. Gyrd-Hansen D, Holund B, Andersen P. A cost-effectiveness analysis of cervical cancer screening: health policy implications. Health Policy 1995;34:35-51.
17. Bos AB, van Ballegooijen M, van Gessel-Dabekaussen AA, Habbema JD. Organized cervical cancer screening still leads to higher coverage than spontaneous screening in the Netherlands. Eur J Cancer 1998;34:1598-601.