Characteristics of Apparently False-Negative Digene Hybrid Capture 2 High-Risk HPV DNA Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study characterized cases with a negative high-risk Hybrid Capture 2 (HRHC2; Digene, Gaithersburg, MD) test result with concurrent or follow-up biopsy-confirmed high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2/3). From 2,306 HRHC2 tests, 10 negative results were identified with CIN 2/3 (false-negative rate, 4.5%). The majority of the patients had abnormal colposcopic findings and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) shown by concurrent cytologic examination, although with few abnormal cells. No trend was evident in the location of the dysplastic epithelium or overall lesion size. In 4 tests, the relative light units over cutoff was more than 0.4 but less than 1.0, suggesting that low quantities of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA were present in the sample. The negative predictive value for HRHC2 testing may be compromised when the copy number of the HPV DNA is low, and a negative HRHC2 test result may be falsely negative in patients with abnormal colposcopic findings or concurrent cytologic findings showing HSIL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".