Cervical Cancer Screening: In-Clinic vs. At-Home – US Preferences

by Grace Chen

“`html

HOUSTON, February 6, 2026 – Cervical cancer screening just got a little more personal-and for most women, that’s exactly how they want it. A new study reveals that over 60% of American women still strongly prefer getting screened for cervical cancer in a clinic, rather than using the recently FDA-approved at-home self-sampling kits.

Most Women Still Prefer the Doctor’s Office for Cervical Cancer Screening

Despite the convenience of at-home tests, a majority of women feel more comfortable with traditional, in-person screenings.

  • A study published today in JAMA Network Open found 60.8% of women prefer in-clinic cervical cancer screenings.
  • Only 23.1% expressed a preference for at-home kits, while 16.1% were unsure.
  • Women with lower incomes, distrust in the healthcare system, or those overdue for screening were more likely to consider at-home testing.

the findings suggest a continued preference for the traditional approach.

Who Might Benefit Most From At-Home Testing?

The study of 2,300 screening-eligible women also uncovered nuances in preference. Women with low incomes and those who harbor distrust in the healthcare system were more likely to be uncertain about wich screening method to choose. Individuals who were overdue for screening, or who had experienced prejudice or discrimination during medical care, were more inclined to favor at-home kits.

“Home-based self-sampling has the potential to remove many of the barriers women face when it comes to cervical cancer screening,” saeid lead author sanjay Shete, Ph.D., deputy division head of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences. “By expanding screening options and pairing them with targeted education, we can empower more women to participate in screening in a way that fits their lives.”

What are the main reasons women would choose at-home screening? Privacy (54.9%), time constraints (35.1%), and avoiding embarrassment (33.4%) were the most frequently cited factors.

A Shift in Screening Rates Since the Pandemic

While cervical cancer screening rates have generally increased over the past 25 years, experts have observed a decline in annual screening coverage since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.This underscores the ongoing need to improve screening uptake, especially among historically under-screened populations.

The study highlighted racial disparities, with Black women demonstrating a lower preference for at-home self-sampling compared to white women. This suggests that culturally tailored outreach and education may be crucial to address these differences.

Both the Health Resources and Services Administration and the American Cancer Society have already adopted home-based self-collection for cervical cancer screening. Co-author Joël Fokom Domgue, M.D., senior researcher of Epidemiology, believes this is a step in the right direction.

“Major public health and medical organizations should consider updating their recommendations to include home-based self-sampling,” Domgue said. “This policy shift could play a critical role in reducing screening inequities and improving uptake among populations that have historically been underserved.”

How Was the Study Conducted?

Researchers based their findings on data from the 2024 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS), a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults. the study included women aged 21-65 who were eligible for cervical cancer screening according to U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines and had responded to questions about cervical cancer screening.

The study authors noted some limitations, including the cross-sectional nature of the HINTS survey, a lack of familiarity with the new at-home screening kits at the time of the survey, and the fact that the FDA had not yet approved the self-collection tool when the data was collected. They also noted that prior screening history was not collected as part of HINTS.

***

this study was supported in part by a grant from the National Cancer Institute (P30CA016672). A full list of collaborating authors

You may also like

Leave a Comment