Cervical Screening Programme, England - 2019-20 [NS]

For 2019-20, data submissions have been made for all LAs, pathology laboratories and colposcopy clinics.

In all LA data tables Isles of Scilly have been combined with Cornwall, and City of London with Hackney, to ensure the data are not disclosed.

The impact of the COVID-19 global pandemic has minimal impact on this data report. The numbers of women tested in the year, reported in the KC53 data return, is thought be affected for the final part of 2019-20.

The data is collected from 1 April 2019 to 31 March 2020. The pandemic started to become evident for the last 2 weeks of this data report. The effects of the pandemic are likely to be more evident in the 2020-21 report.

The NHS Cervical Screening Programme includes regional Screening Quality Assurance Services (SQASs) which quality assure the data collections. Validation undertaken by SQASs varies between regions but some examples of the types of quality assurance checks that SQASs undertake are:

• checks on data completeness
• identification of any unusual figures which are then followed up individually
• comparisons with previous years’ data to ensure that any unusual trends are identified and explained
• consistency checks between different parts of the returns
• checks that totals equal the sums of parts
• checks on the calculations of statistics

Data validation and quality assurance checks are also carried out by NHS Digital as part of the publication process. Validation checks undertaken by NHS Digital include:

• comparisons with previous years’ data to ensure that any unusual trends are identified and explained
• consistency checks between different parts of the returns
• checks that totals equal the sums of parts
• checks on the calculation of statistics
• checking for outliers (figures that are particularly low or high compared to other areas)

Part of NHS Digital’s quality assurance procedure includes returning data tables to the SQASs for verification prior to publication.

The sections below describe the issues/areas identified for further investigation through NHS Digital’s validation processes and the outcomes of follow-ups with the SQASs this year.

Some queries were raised with NHS Digital where the totals of one part did not match another, or a woman below the age of 60 had been categorised as ‘ceased for age reasons’. All of these were resolved upon further investigation, either with resubmissions or an explanation of the discrepancy where a resubmission was not possible.

Where applicable these explanations are provided within the publication and data tables as footnotes.

Comparisons to previous year’s submissions were performed and notable differences were reviewed. All were confirmed to be acceptable and no resubmissions were necessary.

Consistency checks between different parts of the return identified a small number of mismatches. These were raised with the SQAS and corrected through resubmissions or an explanation of the discrepancy where a resubmission was not possible.

Some queries were raised where there were notable differences to previous year’s submissions (year on year sense checks). All of these were signed off following contact with the SQAS with no resubmissions necessary.

No other data quality issues were identified by the SQAS for any laboratory submissions in 2019-20.

Consistency checks between different parts of the return identified issues in the submissions made by some colposcopy clinics.

All of these were resolved following contact with the SQAS either with resubmissions or an explanation of the discrepancy if a resubmission was not possible.

A resubmission of the data was received after the submission deadline. These updates are not reflected in the data in the report. However the changes were small and do not have an impact at national level.

Where applicable explanations for the above are provided within the publication and data tables as footnotes.

There were a number of queries raised in relation to differences from the previous reporting year’s figures. Some of these were cleared with resubmissions of data and the remaining signed off by the SQAS.

No data quality issues were highlighted through the quality assurance and validation procedures. However, an increase in the turnaround time of cervical screening sample results since 2016-17 was noted. Where applicable the report and data tables have been footnoted to reflect this.

For more information on the issue, please see Appendix J of this document.

No data quality issues were highlighted through the quality assurance and validation procedures.

Almost all issues that were highlighted through NHS Digital’s validation processes for follow-up with SQAS were resolved satisfactorily. Any remaining mismatches were small and are thought to have minimal impact on the overall of the statistics.

Where data issues were outstanding, footnotes have been placed against the relevant tables as described above.

1. ‘Exeter’ system (NHAIS), Cancer Screening Statistics VSA15 (time from screening to receipt of results) and PHOF (coverage) Reports