However, the article used two groups that are non-comparable. One group consisted of women, who are over the age 65, are unscreened or inadequately screened, and at high risks for diseases; whereas the other group consisted of women, who are also in this age group, but very well-screened and at low risk for diseases. The article also suggests that older women, who are not at low risk of cervical cancer following a history of negative screening results, may benefit from continued screening. This point was also presented in the counterpoint article. The counterpoint article specifically stated that the new recommendation does not apply to high-risk population. Also, if someone would like to continue screening, she is more than welcome to do
However, the article used two groups that are non-comparable. One group consisted of women, who are over the age 65, are unscreened or inadequately screened, and at high risks for diseases; whereas the other group consisted of women, who are also in this age group, but very well-screened and at low risk for diseases. The article also suggests that older women, who are not at low risk of cervical cancer following a history of negative screening results, may benefit from continued screening. This point was also presented in the counterpoint article. The counterpoint article specifically stated that the new recommendation does not apply to high-risk population. Also, if someone would like to continue screening, she is more than welcome to do