The Significance of Certification in Liquid-Based Cytology and Performance in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytopathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Context. —Morphology training and certification provided by the manufacturer is required before laboratories are allowed to prepare and interpret liquid-based cytology (LBC) gynecologic slides. Whether this certification is associated with improved LBC interpretation performance is not known. Objective. —To determine whether LBC certification correlates with performance. Design. —The results of the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Cervicovaginal Cytopathology for the year 2004 were reviewed. During this year a question on the answer form asked participants whether they were certified in LBC preparations. Participant responses were analyzed at 2 levels of agreement with the reference diagnosis of unknown glass slides mailed quarterly. Results. —For cytotechnologists and pathologists, participants who were LBC certified had a significantly lower total discordant rate to series than participants who were not certified for validated LBC ThinPrep (Cytyc Corp, Marlborough, Mass) preparations ( P < .001 for both groups). The results were similar for validated conventional preparations for pathologists but not for cytotechnologists. The differences were present across most individual diagnostic series. Differences were most striking for low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. In addition, cytotechnologists and pathologists who were certified had a significantly lower total discordant rate to the exact diagnosis for validated LBC ThinPrep slides than those who were not certified (discordant rates for cytotechnologists, 14.14% and 23.36%, respectively, P < .001; for pathologists, 15.99% and 24.07%, respectively, P < .001). Conclusion. —Although not all confounding factors were excluded in this study, LBC certification is associated with a significantly lower discordant rate to both series and exact diagnosis for validated LBC ThinPrep preparations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".