MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156589542 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2002.803597

Optimal excitation wavelengths for discrimination of cervical neoplasia

2002· article· en· W2156589542 on OpenAlexaff
S.K. Chang, M. Follen, Anaís Malpica, Urs Utzinger, Gregg Staerkel, Dennis D. Cox, E. Neely Atkinson, Calum MacAulay, Rebecca Richards‐Kortum

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsExcitationWavelengthExcitation wavelengthIn vivoSquamous intraepithelial lesionFluorescenceCervical intraepithelial neoplasiaMaterials scienceOpticsPathologyMedicineOptoelectronicsPhysicsBiologyInternal medicineCervical cancerCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluorescence spectroscopy has shown promise for the in vivo, real-time detection of cervical neoplasia. However, selection of excitation wavelength has in the past been based on in vitro studies and the availability of light sources. The goal of this study was to determine optimal excitation wavelengths for in vivo detection of cervical neoplasia. Fluorescence excitation-emission matrices (EEMs) were measured in vivo from 351 sites in 146 patients. Data were analyzed in pairs of diagnostic classes to determine which combination of excitation wavelengths yields classification algorithms with the greatest sensitivity and specificity. We find that 330-340-, 350-380-, and 400-450-nm excitation yield the best performance. The sensitivity and specificity for discrimination of squamous normal tissue and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HGSIL) were 71% and 77% on cross validation using three excitation wavelengths. These results are comparable with those found in earlier in vivo studies; however, in this study we find that the proportion of samples which are HGSIL influences performance. Furthermore stratification of samples within low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and HGSIL also appears to influence diagnostic performance. Future diagnostic studies should be carried out at these excitation wavelengths in larger groups so that data can be stratified by diagnostic subcategory, age and menopausal status. Similarly, large studies should be done in screening populations.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations60
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207