IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jorssa/v163y2000i2p191-209.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of cervical cancer mortality and incidence data from England and Wales: evidence of a beneficial effect of screening

Author

Listed:
  • Peter D. Sasieni
  • Joanna Adams

Abstract

Incidence and mortality rates for invasive cervical cancer in England and Wales have changed considerably since records began in 1950s. It is well known that cervical cancer rates show substantial birth cohort effects and these make the interpretation of secular trends difficult. Here the incidence data (from 1971) and mortality data (from 1950) are analysed by using generalized additive models. The goodness of fit is evaluated by using residual plots and scaled changes in deviance. The incidence of squamous cell and adenocarcinoma of the cervix were analysed separately after making an adjustment for those with unknown histology. Although the age and cohort model provides an adequate description of the data up to the mid‐1980s, additional terms are required to model the more recent data. Reasonable fits are obtained by adding functions of calendar year since 1978 in each of three age bands. Estimates of the cohort effects obtained from the incidence of squamous cancer and mortality data are remarkably similar and fit with hypothesized effects of changing sexual norms on cervical cancer rates. Secular trends suggest that cervical screening had little effect on cervical cancer rates before the mid‐1980s and that since then the effect on mortality and incidence of squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix has been substantial whereas the effect on the incidence of adenocarcinoma of the cervix has been modest. Secular trends are greatest in younger women. They are minimal in women aged 70 years and over. If the secular trends are attributed to cervical screening, the models estimate that, as a result of screening, approximately 6000 fewer deaths occurred between 1991 and 1997 and that approximately 4000 fewer squamous cancers were diagnosed between 1989 and 1992.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter D. Sasieni & Joanna Adams, 2000. "Analysis of cervical cancer mortality and incidence data from England and Wales: evidence of a beneficial effect of screening," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 163(2), pages 191-209.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:163:y:2000:i:2:p:191-209
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-985X.00165
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-985X.00165
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-985X.00165?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sabates, Ricardo & Feinstein, Leon, 2006. "The role of education in the uptake of preventative health care: The case of cervical screening in Britain," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(12), pages 2998-3010, June.
    2. Wenjiang J. Fu, 2008. "A Smoothing Cohort Model in Age–Period–Cohort Analysis With Applications to Homicide Arrest Rates and Lung Cancer Mortality Rates," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 36(3), pages 327-361, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:163:y:2000:i:2:p:191-209. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rssssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.