MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162170350 · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.16741

The impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the Ontario Cervical Screening Program, colposcopy and treatment services in Ontario, Canada: a population‐based study

2021· article· en· W3162170350 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Olivia Meggetto, Nathaniel Jembere, Julia Gao, M. Walker, Michelle Rey, Linda Rabeneck, KJ Murphy, Rachel Kupets

Bibliographic record

VenueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreTrillium Health CentrePublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreCancer Care Ontario
FundersCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsColposcopyMedicineCervical screeningPandemicCervical cancerPopulationCytologyCervixGynecologyObstetricsCervical cancer screeningCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CancerInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the immediate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cervical screening, colposcopy and treatment volumes in Ontario, Canada. DESIGN: Population-based retrospective observational study. SETTING: Ontario, Canada. POPULATION: People with a cervix age of 21-69 years who completed at least one cervical screening cytology test, colposcopy or treatment procedure for cervical dysplasia between January 2019 and August 2020. METHODS: Administrative databases were used to compare cervical screening cytology, colposcopy and treatment procedure volumes before (historical comparator) and during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-August 2020). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Changes in cervical screening cytology, colposcopy and treatment volumes; individuals with high-grade cytology awaiting colposcopy. RESULTS: During the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, the monthly average number of cervical screening cytology tests, colposcopies and treatments decreased by 63.8% (range: -92.3 to -41.0%), 39.7% (range: -75.1 to -14.3%) and 31.1% (range: -43.5 to -23.6%), respectively, when compared with the corresponding months in 2019. Between March and August 2020, on average 292 (-51.0%) fewer high-grade cytological abnormalities were detected through screening each month. As of August 2020, 1159 (29.2%) individuals with high-grade screening cytology were awaiting follow-up colposcopy. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on key cervical screening and follow-up services in Ontario. As the pandemic continues, ongoing monitoring of service utilisation to inform system response and recovery is required. Future efforts to understand the impact of COVID-19-related disruptions on cervical cancer outcomes will be needed. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: COVID-19 has had a substantial impact on cervical screening and follow-up services in Ontario, Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations56
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & GynaecologySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207