TOPLINE

Cervical cancer screening (CCS) rates increased across all racial and ethnic groups from 2019 to 2024, with Hispanic patients experiencing the largest gain — rising from 9.85% to more than 15%. However, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander patients consistently had the lowest screening rates throughout the study period, and patients in Western and Southern census regions also had lower rates compared with other areas.

METHODOLOGY

• A retrospective cross-sectional study evaluated CCS rates among female patients aged 21 to 64 years with at least one healthcare encounter in an electronic medical record (EMR) system from 2019 through 2024, stratified by race and ethnicity, age, language, and census region.
• Annual sample sizes ranged from approximately 9 million to 16 million patients and increased steadily over time; most patients were non-Hispanic White, aged 30 to 49 years, English-speaking, and resided in either the South or Northeast.
• Researchers used International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), Current Procedural Terminology (CPT), and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes to identify CCS receipt.
• Descriptive statistics summarized annual CCS rates across demographic groups, and the Cochran-Armitage test assessed linear trends over time.

TAKEAWAY

• Non-Hispanic White patients had the highest annual CCS rates from 2019 to 2021 but experienced the smallest percentage increase, from 10.98% to 13.85%, over the study period.
• Hispanic patients experienced the largest percentage increase in CCS rates, from 9.85% to 15.51%.
• Patients aged 30 to 49 years and non-English-speaking patients consistently had the highest CCS rates across all years.
• All racial and ethnic groups and age groups showed statistically significant increases in CCS rates over time (P < .001 for trend).

IN PRACTICE

"Although screening uptake has improved over time, substantial geographic and racial and ethnic disparities in CCS persist, highlighting important areas for future research and intervention efforts," wrote the authors of the study.

SOURCE

The study was led by Yunbo Xie, MPH, Department of Healthcare Transformation Initiatives, Center for Population Health Management & Quality, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. It was published online on October 16 in JAMA Network Open.

LIMITATIONS

The use of ICD-10, CPT, and HCPCS codes across more than 1805 hospitals may have introduced variability in coding practices and documentation, potentially leading to misclassification. Denominators varied across subgroup analyses because category-specific populations were based on available demographic information, and the impact of incomplete data could not be assessed. The database is derived exclusively from health systems using a particular EMR system, which may not capture CCS performed in community health clinics or other settings, limiting generalizability and potentially introducing selection and collider bias.

DISCLOSURES

The study did not receive specific funding. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.