Teal Health is proud to share peer-reviewed research examining how Hispanic/Latinx women experienced at-home cervical cancer screening in our pivotal SELF-CERV clinical trial. Published in Hispanic Health Care International, this analysis looks specifically at the 115 Hispanic/Latinx participants in the trial — what stood in the way of screening for them, how they felt about collecting their own sample, and whether the Teal Wand™ performed as well for them as it did for everyone else.
The short answer: it did. And Hispanic/Latinx women preferred it more strongly than any other group in the study.
The problem we set out to solve
Cervical cancer is preventable, but prevention only works if people get screened — and screening rates aren't equal across communities. The CDC reports cervical cancer incidence of 9.6 per 100,000 among Hispanic women, compared with 6.9 per 100,000 among White non-Hispanic women. National survey data show that Hispanic women are also less likely to have ever been screened, compared to non-Hispanic women (79.3% vs. 91.4%). Follow-up after an abnormal result is another gap, and Hispanic women have been reported to have lower rates of attending colposcopy referrals.
There's a common assumption baked into a lot of this data that the gap exists because Hispanic women are less aware of screening or less engaged with preventive care. We wanted to test that assumption directly, and to understand whether an at-home option could remove the barriers that are actually in the way.
What we studied
This is a post hoc analysis of SELF-CERV, the pivotal U.S. trial that clinically validated the Teal Wand for at-home cervical cancer screening. SELF-CERV enrolled 609 participants aged 25 to 65 across 16 clinical sites nationwide. Each participant used the Teal Wand to collect their own vaginal sample in a simulated at-home environment, then had a clinician collect a sample using a standard speculum and cervical brush. Both were tested for high-risk HPV using the FDA-approved Roche cobas® assay.
Of the 603 participants who used the device, 115 (19.1%) identified as Hispanic/Latinx, closely mirroring U.S. Census representation. Roughly a quarter of those participants (25.3%) said Spanish was their primary language. Instructions were written at a 5th/6th grade reading level and offered in Spanish, as were the usability and preference surveys.
This analysis compares the experiences, barriers, and preferences of Hispanic/Latinx participants with those of non-Hispanic participants. The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06120205).
What we found
The Teal Wand worked equally well across groups. Agreement between self-collected and clinician-collected samples for detecting high-risk HPV was equal between Hispanic/Latinx and non-Hispanic participants — no significant difference by ethnicity (p = 0.480). Valid sample collection rates were also comparable (p = 0.755). The Teal Wand performed as accurately as the clinician collecting a sample.
It was just as easy to use. 93% of Hispanic/Latinx participants found the Wand easy or very easy to use (vs. 92% of non-Hispanic participants), and 81% felt confident they had collected their sample properly (vs. 77%). Usability held across language and culture.
Awareness was not the barrier. There was no meaningful difference between groups in understanding that screening is intended to prevent cervical cancer — about 83% in both groups understood the purpose. There was also no statistically significant difference in reported screening delays (38% vs. 30%, p = 0.118). Contrary to some published assumptions, Hispanic/Latinx participants were aware of why screening matters and engaged with the healthcare system.
Cost was a barrier. Of all the barriers participants named, only one differed significantly between groups: financial barriers such as cost, job loss, or loss of insurance, cited by 48% of Hispanic/Latinx participants compared with 27% of non-Hispanic participants (p = 0.016). Other barriers — discomfort with the exam, lack of time, fear of results — were reported at nearly identical rates across both groups. This tracked with the socioeconomic picture: Hispanic/Latinx participants reported significantly lower household income, lower rates of private insurance, with more uninsured, and lower levels of educational attainment (all p < 0.001).
Self-collection felt meaningfully more empowering. 94% of Hispanic/Latinx participants said collecting their own sample made them feel empowered or more in control, compared with 78% of non-Hispanic participants (p < 0.001). Across the full study population, 81% reported feeling this way.
Preference for self-collection was significantly stronger. 78% of Hispanic/Latinx participants preferred self-collection over an in-clinic speculum exam, compared with 62% of non-Hispanic participants (p = 0.001).
At-home self-collection moved the needle on staying up to date. 95% of Hispanic/Latinx participants said they would be more likely to stay current with cervical cancer screening if an at-home self-collection option were available, compared with 84% of non-Hispanic participants (p = 0.002).
Telehealth is a realistic delivery channel. More than 99% of participants in both groups reported using a smartphone. Roughly half said they'd prefer a video visit to an in-person visit when no physical testing is required (47% of Hispanic/Latinx participants, 45% of non-Hispanic participants). Notably, Hispanic/Latinx participants were more likely to say they don't see a healthcare provider regularly (14.9% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.028) — which is exactly why a screening pathway that doesn't require an in-clinic visit matters.
Why it matters
The most important finding here is what wasn't true. Hispanic/Latinx women in this study weren't less informed about cervical cancer screening, weren't less motivated, and weren't less capable of collecting an accurate sample. The obstacle was cost and access — structural barriers, not knowledge gaps.
That reframes what a solution needs to look like. Education campaigns alone don't fix financial barriers. But a clinically validated at-home option, prescribed through a telehealth visit and completed without taking time off work, arranging childcare, or finding transportation, addresses the actual obstacle. And the data show it's the option this community wants: Hispanic/Latinx participants endorsed self-collection more strongly, felt more empowered by it, and were more likely to say it would keep them up to date on screening.
Modeling research suggests the most effective path to eliminating cervical cancer in the U.S. is by reaching 90% of eligible women with screening. That's not achievable without closing disparities in the communities the current system has been missing.
Teal Health's role
Teal Health designed the Teal Wand specifically for at-home use, with a form factor built for comfort and usability across different bodies, life stages, and circumstances, and with instructions written for accessibility, including a Spanish-language version. SELF-CERV is the foundational trial behind the Teal Wand and supported its FDA authorization in May 2025 as the first at-home self-collection device for cervical cancer screening authorized in the United States.
This analysis joins a growing body of peer-reviewed Teal-led research examining how at-home screening performs for the people the current system reaches least well, including sub-analyses on screening among women with higher BMI (Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics) and screening experiences for LGBQ+ patients (Cancer Control).
You can read more about the trial, results, and demographics in our SELF-CERV study report.
We built Teal because cervical cancer is preventable, but only if people can actually get screened. This research says that for a community bearing more of the disease burden and facing more of the screening obstacles, an accurate at-home option is both wanted and effective.