Psychosocial morbidity in women with abnormal cervical cytology managed by cytological surveillance or initial colposcopy: longitudinal analysis from the TOMBOLA randomised trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare psychosocial outcomes (follow-up related worries and satisfaction with follow-up related information and support) over 30 months of two alternative management policies for women with low-grade abnormal cervical cytology. METHODS: Women aged 20-59 years with low-grade cytological abnormalities detected in the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme were randomised to cytological surveillance or initial colposcopy. A total of 3399 women who completed psychosocial questionnaires at recruitment were invited to complete questionnaires at 12, 18, 24 and 30 months. Linear mixed models were used to investigate differences between arms in the two psychosocial outcomes. Each outcome had a maximum score of 100, and higher scores represented higher psychosocial morbidity. RESULTS: On average, over 30 months, women randomised to colposcopy scored 2.5 points (95%CI -3.6 to -1.3) lower for follow-up related worries than women randomised to cytological surveillance. Women in the colposcopy arm also scored significantly lower for follow-up related satisfaction with information and support (-2.4; -3.3 to -1.4) over 30 months. For both outcomes, the average difference between arms was greatest at 12th- and 18th-month time points. These differences remained when the analysis was stratified by post-school education. CONCLUSIONS: Women with low-grade cytology, irrespective of their management, have substantial initial psychosocial morbidity that reduces over time. Implementation of newer screening strategies, which include surveillance, such as primary HPV screening, need to consider the information and support provided to women. © 2016 The Authors. Psycho-Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".