MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008387080 · doi:10.1159/000360066

Analysis of Nondiagnostic Results in a Large Series of Thyroid Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology Performed over 9 Years in a Single Center

2014· article· en· W2008387080 on OpenAlex
Marta Ferreira, Renê Gerhard, Fernando Schmitt

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Cytologica · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThyroid Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCytologyThyroidFine needle aspiration cytologySeries (stratigraphy)Fine-needle aspirationRadiologyCytopathologyNuclear medicineBiopsyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Thyroid fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is the most valuable, cost-effective and accurate method for the evaluation of patients with thyroid nodules. One of its limitations is that up to 20% of results are nondiagnostic or unsatisfactory. The aim of this study was to analyze the number of thyroid FNAC specimens with nondiagnostic results obtained on an outpatient basis and how many of these had to be repeated according to their results. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis of diagnostic reports of nondiagnostic thyroid FNAC specimens obtained between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2012 which were retrieved by means of a computerized search. The FNAC results and the age and sex of the patients were collected. RESULTS: From a total of 15,292 thyroid FNAC specimens, 6.8% (n = 1,033) corresponded to nondiagnostic cases. Eligible diagnostic reports for analysis included 877 cases (106 were repetitions of previous nondiagnostic FNAC). After an initial nondiagnostic finding for 771 FNAC smears, 29.5% (n = 225) were repeated with the following results: 43.6% insufficient, 49.3% benign, 6.2% follicular neoplasm, 0.4% suspicious for malignancy and 0.4% malignant. Twenty-two patients underwent a second repeated FNAC. Here the findings were: 36.4% insufficient, 59.1% benign, 4.5% follicular neoplasm, 0.0% suspicious for malignancy and 0.0% malignant. CONCLUSIONS: There was a low rate of repeated FNAC among the group of nondiagnostic cases. With repeated FNAC, the rate of nondiagnostic cases and the number of results that potentially demand surgery diminish.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it