Comparative study on the adequacy of cervical smears using wooden Ayre’s spatula, VS Papcone® sampling device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a comparative study on the adequacy of cervical smears obtained using the Papcone® sampling device or wooden Ayre's spatula conducted from two tertiary health facilities -- Nnamdi Azikiwe University Teaching Hospital Nnewi and Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University Teaching Hospital Awka, in Anambra State, Nigeria. Slides from smears obtained using both devices were read by a cytopathologist blinded for the study. The primary outcome was the proportion of smears with an adequate endocervical component. Significantly higher adequate cervical smears were obtained in 177/192 (92.2%) women using the Papcone® sampling device, compared to 152/192 (79.2%) using wooden Ayre's spatula (p < 0.001). Kappa analysis showed moderate inter-rater agreement between the two devices. We recommend the use of the Papcone device when it is available, as the adequacy of cervical smears obtained with the Papcone® was better than that obtained using wooden Ayre's spatula.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".