MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2179692930 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v6n3p76

Accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid in cervical ectopy evaluation

2015· article· en· W2179692930 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Doaa M. Sheesha, Suzan El-Said Mansour, Nahed F. Kheder, Mohammad Emam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMansoura University
KeywordsMedicineOutpatient clinicObstetrics and gynaecologyGynecological ExaminationObstetricsGynecologyPathologicalPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cervical erosion is one of the most common pathological conditions encountered in outpatient gynecological clinics in middle-aged women. A simple method for diagnosis and treatment can play a tremendous role to comfort these women. Methods: The study includes fifty female patients attended the outpatient clinic of obstetrics & gynecology department in Mansoura University hospitals. All patients selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The study was undertaken during the period from June 2014 to December 2014. Tools: Two tools were used for data collection: (1) Interviewing questionnaire schedule divided into three parts which were used to assess general characteristics of women, obstetric and gynecological history and the presence of cervical ectopy symptoms. (2) Local cervical assessment by vinegar acetic acid (VIA) test. Results: The study results revealed that 30 subjects (60%) were VIA positive and 20 subjects (40%) were VIA negative. VIA sensitivity was 100%, specificity 45%, PPV 71% and NPV 75%. There was a statistically significant relation between duration of marriage, high parity, IUDs use and VIA positivity. Conclusions: Using VIA test was an accurate and effective method for detection of cervical ectopy. VIA test should be performed in all the women attending outpatient gynecological clinics even in the presence of Pap smear facility to improve detection rate of cervical lesions and provide better patient counseling and treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207