MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109148276

Comparison of human papillomavirus DNA testing and repeat Papanicolaou test in women with low-grade cervical cytologic abnormalities: a randomized trial. HPV Effectiveness in Lowgrade Paps (HELP) Study No. 1 Group.

2000· article· en· W2109148276 on OpenAlexaff
Alice Lytwyn, J W Sellors, J B Mahony, D Daya, W. Chapman, Nathan A. Ellis, Paula Roth, Attila T. Lörincz, A. Gafni

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAscus (bryozoa)Papanicolaou stainColposcopyMedicineCervical intraepithelial neoplasiaGynecologyPapanicolaou TestCytologyBethesda systemPap testObstetricsPapillomaviridaeHuman papillomavirusCervical cancerInternal medicineCervical cancer screeningCancerPathologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Results of cervical cytology screening showing atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) or low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) indicate risk for high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN 2 or 3). In a community-based randomized trial we compared the test performance of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing with that of 6-month repeat Papanicolaou (Pap) test in detecting histologically confirmed CIN 2 or 3. METHODS: We randomly assigned 212 women aged 16-50 years with ASCUS or LSIL on cervical cytology screening to undergo either immediate HPV DNA testing or a repeat Pap test in 6 months. Cervical swabs for the HPV DNA testing and the Pap smears were obtained by their family physicians. We tested the swabs for oncogenic HPV using the Hybrid Capture II assay (Digene Corp., Beltsville, Md.). Community-based pathologists examined the Pap smears. All women were referred for colposcopy by their family physicians. Two gynecological pathologists assessed the histology findings. We calculated test performance in women who completed the trial using CIN 2 or 3 as the reference standard. RESULTS: A total of 159 women completed the study. Compared with HPV DNA testing, which detected 87.5% (7/8) of the cases of CIN 2 or 3, repeat Pap smear showing high-grade intraepithelial neoplasia (HSIL) detected 11.1% (1/9) of cases (p = 0.004), and repeat Pap smear showing ASCUS, LSIL or HSIL detected 55.6% (5/9) (p = 0.16). Corresponding specificities were 50.6%, 95.2% (p = 0.002) and 55.6% (p = 0.61). Loss to follow-up was 17.1% in the HPV test group and 32.7% in the repeat Pap group (p = 0.009). Given the 7 cases of CIN 2 or 3 detected by HPV testing and the 5 cases detected by the repeat Pap smear, the incremental cost of HPV testing was calculated to be $3003 per additional case of CIN identified. INTERPRETATION: HPV DNA testing was more costly but was associated with significantly less loss to follow-up. It may detect more cases of CIN 2 or 3 in women with low-grade cytologic abnormalities.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations62
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207