Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jul 1;157(1):32-40.
doi: 10.1002/ijc.35403. Epub 2025 Apr 10.

Technical, legal and ethical framework of cancer audit in cervical screening - Summary of best practices for organised programmes delineated through an expert group consultation

Arunah Chandran  1 , Anne Mackie  2 , Peter Sasieni  3 , Marc Arbyn  4 , Andre L Carvalho  1 , Clement Chauvet  1 , Walter Prendiville  1 , Elisabete Weiderpass  1 , Partha Basu  1 ; CervScreen Technical Working Group
Collaborators, Affiliations

Technical, legal and ethical framework of cancer audit in cervical screening - Summary of best practices for organised programmes delineated through an expert group consultation

Arunah Chandran et al. Int J Cancer. .

Abstract

Efficient and well-organised cervical screening programmes have significantly reduced both the incidence and mortality rates of cervical cancer in the population. For optimal performance, such programmes need to incorporate essential quality assurance measures. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC/WHO) organised an expert consultation to delineate best practices in auditing cancers in a cervical screening programme, the legal and ethical frameworks governing such audits, and communicating audit outcomes. As a best practice, every programme should have a well-documented policy and process framework for cancer audits. The TWGs agreed that the primary goal of programmatic cancer audits is to assess the programme's effectiveness in lowering cervical cancer incidence and minimising screening-related risks. Using audit results, informed decisions can be made to enhance service delivery, including professional training, adopting improved screening tests, strengthening fail-safe mechanisms, reducing delays, and minimising inequalities. Legal complexities in cervical screening stem from its inherent limitations and risks, and differentiating cases of negligence from inevitable and non-negligent errors where an abnormality is not detected but actually exists is crucial. TWGs suggested that determining whether a screening error was serious enough to be categorised as negligent and/or to entitle the patient to compensation should reflect the inherent limitations of cervical screening. Data obtained while performing screening tests and subsequent diagnostic tests or treatments are sensitive and need to be safeguarded. The best practice document drafted through expert consultation will help cervical screening programmes standardise practices related to cancer audits and address associated legal and ethical issues.

Keywords: cancer audit; cervical cancer screening; communication; ethics; legal.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Sciensano, the employer of M. Arbyn, received funding from the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and the European Commission Initiative on Cervical Cancer (EC‐CvC). Peter Sasieni reports consulting for PreTect HPV‐Proofer. The other authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Forrest C, O'Donoghue K, Collins DC, O'Reilly S. Current Irish medicolegal landscape: an unsustainable trajectory. BMJ Open Qual. 2023;12(3):e002433. - PMC - PubMed
    1. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, The Department of Health and the Health Service Executive of Ireland . Best Practices in Cervical Screening Programmes: Audit of Cancers, Legal and Ethical Frameworks, Communication, and Workforce Competencies. International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2023. - PubMed
    1. Fitzpatrick P, Mooney T, Byrne H, Healy O, Russell N, O'Reilly S. Interval cancer audit and disclosure in cervical screening programmes: an international survey. J Med Screen. 2022;29(2):104‐109. - PubMed
    1. Public Health England . Cervical screening: invasive cervical cancer audit 2013 to 2016: audit report. 2019. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cervical-screening-invasive-c...
    1. Public Health England . Cervical screening: invasive cervical cancer audit 2013 to 2016: audit methods. 2019. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cervical-screening-invasive-c...

MeSH terms