MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053991401 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.06.035

Successes and challenges of establishing a cervical cancer screening and treatment program in western Kenya

2013· article· en· W2053991401 on OpenAlexaff
Kareem Khozaim, Omenge Orang’o, Astrid Christoffersen‐Deb, Peter Itsura, John Oguda, Hellen Muliro, Jackline Ndiema, Grace Mwangi, Matthew Strother, Susan Cu‐Uvin, Barry P. Rosen, Sierra Washington

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColposcopyCervical cancerHysterectomyCryotherapyPopulationCervixDysplasiaBiopsyObstetricsSurgeryGynecologyCancerRadiologyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the challenges and successes of integrating a public-sector cervical screening program into a large HIV care system in western Kenya. METHODS: The present study was a programmatic description and a retrospective chart review of data collected from a cervical screening program based on visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA) between June 2009 and October 2011. RESULTS: In total, 6787 women were screened: 1331 (19.6%) were VIA-positive, of whom 949 (71.3%) had HIV. Overall, 206 women underwent cryotherapy, 754 colposcopy, 143 loop electrical excision procedure (LEEP), and 27 hysterectomy. Among the colposcopy-guided biopsies, 27.9% had severe dysplasia and 10.9% had invasive cancer. There were 68 cases of cancer, equating to approximately 414 per 100000 women per year. Despite aggressive strategies, the overall loss to follow-up was 31.5%: 27.9% were lost after a positive VIA screen, 49.3% between biopsy and LEEP, and 59.6% between biopsy and hysterectomy/chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: The established infrastructure of an HIV treatment program was successfully used to build capacity for cervical screening in a low-resource setting. By using task-shifting and evidence-based, low-cost approaches, population-based cervical screening in a rural African clinical network was found to feasible; however, loss to follow-up and poor pathology infrastructure remain important obstacles.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations89
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207