MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2405996344

Whatever happened to the annual pap smear?

2013· article· en· W2405996344 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marguerite B. Vigliani

Notice bibliographique

RevuePubMed · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
ThématiquePharmaceutical industry and healthcare
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCervical cancerMedicineCancerReading (process)BiographyFamily medicineHistoryArt historyInternal medicineLaw
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The reading programs at Rhode Island College, Providence College and Roger Williams University selected the book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot, as required summer reading for incoming freshman last year. This book is a nonfiction biography of a poor, black, working mother of five children who died of cervical cancer at the age of 31. The work is a masterpiece of investigative reporting because it reads like fiction, weaving together the life of a patient whose cancer cells became known as “HeLa” cells and the scientific history of how these cells helped scientists unravel the mystery of DNA, find a cure for polio, and produce medications for leukemia, influenza, and many other diseases. In 1951, when Lacks was diagnosed with inoperable cervical cancer, screening for cervical cancer was in its infancy. George Papanicolau had first reported that cervical cancer could be detected by means of a vaginal smear in 1928, but his work was not recognized until 1943, when he and Herbert Traut reported that smears could be used to diagnose cervical cancer at an early stage. At the beginning even pathologists were generally opposed to the Pap smear because it was an extremely complicated, time-consuming test with uncertain results. In 1952, the American Cancer Society’s (ACS) medical director, Charles S. Cameron, MD, wrote an editorial to the New York Times complaining that most physicians were not willing to cooperate with his organization’s efforts to promote cancer checkups that included the Pap smear. Over time the Pap smear campaign became overwhelmingly successful, due in part to the efforts of the ACS, but also due to the momentum of the women’s movement and books like Our Bodies Ourselves, which promoted the annual Pap test. In 1960, only 30 percent of American women had ever had a Pap smear, and 40% had never even heard of it. By the mid-1970s, over 50% of women were having annual Pap smears, and by 1980 the figures had jumped to 80%. Over the same interval, deaths from cervical cancer declined by almost 70%. Today, there still are over 4,500 new cases of invasive cervical cancer diagnosed annually, with most of these occurring in women who have never had a Pap smear. Despite its success, there is actually very little science to support the choice of an annual screening interval for cervical cancer screening. This particular screening interval was adopted somewhat arbitrarily to mirror the rhythm of refilling annual birth control prescriptions, but it became an annual ritual for millions of American women. In 1976, the Canadian Walton Report challenged the annual screening interval by suggesting that cervical cancer screening every 3 years was as effective as annual screening and in 1980 a National Institutes of Health panel advocated that all women have a Pap smear every one to three years. By 1992, it was apparent that cervical cancer was causally related to the human papilloma virus (HPV) virus. Terminology for the interpretation of Pap smears was standardized in 2001, eliminating much confusion about the interpretation of smears; and by 2003 it became possible to detect the HPV virus from the Pap smear sample itself, enabling doctors to identify high-risk women. In 2003, both The ACS and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology changed their cervical cancer screening recommendations to take into account the biology of cervical cancer as well as the evidence that a longer screening interval was as effective as the annual smear for women who had previously had three consecutive negative smears. In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration licensed the first vaccine to prevent cervical cancer caused by certain strains of HPV. Now, with both the HPV vaccine and virus testing available, the possibility of reducing the interval for Pap smears even further has become a reality.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,017
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,036

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,038
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,004
Communication savante0,0040,006
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,014
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0110,005

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,410
Tête enseignante GPT0,493
Écart entre enseignants0,083 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePubMed→Même sujetPharmaceutical industry and healthcare→Travaux en français237 207→