FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 354:1535-1536 April 6, 2006 Number 14 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article Related Article by Goldie, S. J. PubMed Citation

To the Editor: The study by the Alliance for Cervical Cancer Prevention Cost Working Group, reported by Goldie et al. (Nov. 17 issue),¹ is biased against cytologic screening. Costs for cytologic tests are overestimated. Costs for human papillomavirus (HPV) tests are underestimated. Single-visit cytologic screening² is not considered. The Alliance was awarded a $50-million gift from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on the assumption that noncytologic screening tests constitute the most likely solution to the problem of cervical cancer in developing countries.³ This assumption constitutes a potential source of bias against cytology that should be disclosed. Similarly, the partnership . . . [Full Text of this Article]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Tong, H., Shen, R., Wang, Z., Kan, Y., Wang, Y., Li, F., Wang, F., Yang, J., Guo, X., for the Mass Cervical Cancer Screening Regimen Gro, (2009). DNA Ploidy Cytometry Testing for Cervical Cancer Screening in China (DNACIC Trial): a Prospective Randomized, Controlled Trial. Clin. Cancer Res. 15: 6438-6445 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Suba, E. J. (2007). SUBA RESPONDS. AJPH 97: 201-202 [Full Text]  
• Suba, E. J. (2007). SUBA RESPONDS. AJPH 97: 199-200 [Full Text]