Notice bibliographique
Résumé
To investigate the role of endocervical curettage (ECC) in the evaluation of cervical dysplasia, the authors analyzed information from a database listing 581 patients with cervical abnormality. All patients had control spatula and cytobrush smears and underwent colposcopic examination with ECC. In patients with acetowhite epithelium, biopsy samples were obtained from the most suspicious areas before ECC was performed. A low-grade lesion was diagnosed in the cervical smears of 40.5 percent of the patients studied. ECC results were negative in 104 of these 115 (92 percent) patients with stage 1 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN1) and positive for low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSILs) in only 8 women (9 percent). One patient had a cervical smear indicating LSIL and ECC results indicating CIN2–3. Among the 70 patients with a smear showing high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs), 56 (80 percent) had negative ECC results. ECC also showed CIN2–3 in 20 percent. There were no patients with CIN1 on their ECC if the cervical smear at the time of colposcopic examination was negative (98 patients). Only 9 percent had ECC results showing CIN1, and none had a more severe diagnosis. ECC results were similar in patients with and without satisfactory colposcopy results. There was no association of positive ECC results with acetowhite grade II epithelium. Colposcopically directed exocervical biopsy showed CIN1 in 53 percent of patients. The ECC results were negative in 88 percent of these women and showed CIN1 in 9 percent and CIN2–3 in 3 percent. Among the 85 patients with CIN2–3 diagnosed by biopsy, the ECC specimen was negative in 81 percent, CIN1 was found in 5 percent, and CIN2–3 was found in 14 percent. The result of exocervical biopsy was negative in 34 patients, 3 patients (9 percent) were diagnosed with CIN1 on ECC, and 1 patient (3 percent) had CIN2–3. The association of positive histologic results with the ECC diagnosis was significant (P = .000001). Cone biopsy was performed in 38 patients. The biopsy specimen showed CIN1 in seven patients, five of whom had CIN1 diagnosed by ECC and two of whom had CIN2–3. Fifteen of 18 patients with CIN2–3 indicated by the cone specimen had CIN2–3 indicated by the ECC specimen. In the other three, CIN1 was indicated by ECC. One patient each with CIN1 and CIN2–3 diagnosed in the ECC specimen had microinvasive cancer in the cone biopsy specimen. One woman with an ECC diagnosis of CIN2–3 had invasive cancer found by cone biopsy. In all, 19 of the 23 patients with CIN2–3 (83 percent) had positive results on cone biopsy, and 15 of the 23 had the same diagnosis on cone biopsy and ECC. Five had a more severe diagnosis, including microinvasive or deeply invasive cancer (three women). During 1 year of follow-up, 15 of the 28 patients with CIN1 in the ECC specimen underwent conization. Among these women were five cases of CIN1, three of CIN2–3, and one of microinvasive cancer. J Lower Genital Tract Dis 2000;4:125–127
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».