Cervical Cancer Control, Priorities and New Directions

Cervical cancer is caused by infection with a range of high risk oncogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) types, and it is now accepted that >99% of cervical cancer is initiated by HPV infection. The estimated lifetime risk of cervical cancer is nevertheless relatively low (less than I in 20 for most community based studies). Although sensitivity and specificity of the available diagnostic techniques are suboptimal, Screening for persistent HPV infection is effective in reducing the incidence of cervical cancer. Infection can be detected by molecular techniques or by cytological examination of exfoliated cervical cells. Persistent infection is the single best predictor of risk of cervical cancer.(1) The latest findings of HPV and cervical cancer research need to be widely disseminated to the scientific and medical societies that are updating screening and management protocols, public health professionals, and to women and clinicians. This report reviews current evidence, clinical implications and directions for further research in the prevention, control and management of cervical cancer. We report the conclusions of the Experts' Meeting at the EUROGIN 2003 conference. (C) 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

The practice of participatory planning at Mapoon Aboriginal settlement: Towards community control, ownership and autonomy

The practice of participatory planning in discrete Indigenous settlements has been established since the early 1990s. In addition to technical and economic goals, participatory planning also seeks community development outcomes, including community control, ownership and autonomy. This paper presents an evaluation of one such planning project, conducted at Mapoon in 1995. The Plan successfully improved physical infrastructure and housing, but had mixed success in terms of community development. Despite various efforts to follow participatory processes, the Plan was essentially a passing event, community control progressively diminished after its completion, and outcomes fell short of notions of ownership and autonomy. This suggests some misunderstandings between the practice of participatory planning and the workings of governance.