2001 Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Women with Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To provide consensus guidelines for the management of women with histologically confirmed cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN), which can act as a precursor to invasive cervical cancer and represents one of the most common significant gynecologic diseases of women of reproductive age. PARTICIPANTS: An independent panel of 121 experts in various aspects of the diagnosis and management of cervical cancer precursors, including representatives from 29 participating professional organizations, federal agencies, national and international health organizations, and others invited by the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP). CONSENSUS PROCESS: Guidelines for the management of women with CIN were developed through a multistep process. Working groups, who performed formal literature reviews and obtained input from the professional community at large by way of an interactive Internet-based bulletin board, developed draft management guidelines. At the ASCCP Consensus Conference, September 6-8, 2001, in Bethesda, Maryland, all guidelines were discussed, revised, and adopted by formal vote. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based guidelines have been developed for the management of women with biopsy-confirmed CIN.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".