Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

List of primary HPV screening strategies evaluated.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Modelled screening pathways of (a) CP, (b) S1a, (c) S2a, (d) S3a and (e) S4a. Coloured boxes indicate variations in other sub-strategies assessed.

HG- High-grade (including ASC-H and HSIL); HR HPV– high risk HPV; LG –low-grade (including ASC-US and LSIL); Neg—Negative; OHR HPV- non-16/18 high -risk HPV

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 2.

Selected key model parameter assumptions.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Model-predicted cervical cancer incidence, cervical cancer death, histologically-confirmed CIN2/3 and cost associated with screening program.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Estimated age-specific of cervical cancer incidence rate and cervical cancer mortality rate for all strategies.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Cost-effectiveness planes for (a) unvaccinated scenario and (b) vaccinated scenario.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Model-predicted resource utilisation for all, assuming 2017 Australian female population.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Model predicted average lifetime number of (a) screening/follow-up episodes and (b) number of colposcopies examinations.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Comparison of the number of cervical cancer cases with the number of women who received treatment for precancer predicted for each strategy.

Numbers shown on the chart represent the number of additional treatments required per cancer case prevented compared to current practice. The number of additional treatments required per cancer case prevented ratio was calculated for each strategy with a higher number precancer treatments and lower number of cervical cancer cases than CP. The calculated ratio is display in the figure on side of the marker that represents the strategy.

More »

Fig 6 Expand