Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Overview of self-sampling methods shows improved acceptance, patient satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness in cervical cancer screening.
Cervical cancer remains the fourth most common malignancy among women worldwide. Despite well-developed prevention measures, incidence and mortality continue to rise, especially in low- and middle-income countries due to low screening coverage and unavailability of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. The cervical cancer screening coverage could be improved by the implementation of a self-sampling modality for HPV testing. Multiple research pieces support the validity and reliability of a self-sampling modality as an alternative approach to clinician-collected samples for primary cervical cancer screening via HPV genotyping. Moreover, growing research evidence on the self-sampling modality reception shows high acceptance of the method among screened populations. Studies on the self-sampling approach economic efficiency also revealed a high cost-effectiveness of HPV testing through a self-sampling modality compared to other screening modalities for cervical cancer. It is specifically important for low-resource settings, which should use the self-sampling cost advantages to improve cervical cancer screening coverage by attracting underscreened populations. Overall, self-sampling modality has a higher participation rate and better patient satisfaction reported; thus, the method is highly recommended by the World Health Organization for cervical cancer screening.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rakhat et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: