MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prospective Evaluation of Colposcopic Features in Predicting Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia: Degree of Acetowhite Change Most Important

2003· article· en· W2044046275 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth Shaw, John W. Sellors, Janusz Kaczorowski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lower Genital Tract Disease · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColposcopyMedicineGrading (engineering)Cervical intraepithelial neoplasiaProspective cohort studyMultivariate analysisCervical cancerRadiologyPathologyInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE.: To prospectively evaluate the contribution of three colposcopic features-degree of acetowhite change, blood vessel pattern, and lesion margin-to the diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS.: A total of 301 women, who participated in two randomized controlled trials and a cross-sectional study of human papillomavirus testing and who were referred to a regional colposcopy center, were studied. Women were examined by colposcopists, who prospectively scored all abnormal transformation zones using three features. The site with the highest score (the most abnormal site) was biopsied and histology reviewed by two pathologists. RESULTS.: In multivariate analysis, degree of acetowhite change was the only feature significantly associated with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. CONCLUSIONS.: Grading lesion severity using degree of acetowhite change alone gave comparable results to grading using the three combined features.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lower Genital Tract DiseaseSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207