- Amanda Herbert, consultant histopathologist and cytopathologist1,
- John H F Smith, consultant histopathologist and cytopathologist2
- 1Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 7EH amanda.herbert@kcl.ac.uk
- 2Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF
There may be several reasons why cervical screening coverage in young women has fallen yet again, including problems with access to appointments with general practitioners, but the new policy not to screen women aged 20-24 can hardly have helped.1 It was announced with the message that screening that age group caused more harm than good, which is unlikely to encourage them to accept their invitations from age 25. Prevalence of carcinoma in situ (CIN3) has increased in women aged 20-24 (figure …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Does iron deficiency without anaemia cause fatigue and what is the reason behind it?
Published 26 May 2012
Re: Histology of Pilar Cysts - a counsel of perfection?
Published 26 May 2012
Re: David Southall: anatomy of a wrecked career
Published 26 May 2012
Re: The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality
Published 26 May 2012
Re: Five years after baby Peter
Published 26 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27