MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323349783 · doi:10.1093/jalm/jfac142

AACC Guidance Document on Cervical Cancer Detection: Screening, Surveillance, and Diagnosis

2023· article· en· W4323349783 on OpenAlex
Yusheng Zhu, Sarah Feldman, Shuk On Annie Leung, Michael H. Creer, Joshua I. Warrick, Nicole Williams, Stephen Mastorides

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineColposcopyCervical cancerCervical screeningCancer screeningGynecologyCervical cancer screeningCancerObstetricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Persistent genital infection with high-risk human papilloma virus (hrHPV) causes the vast majority of cases of cervical cancer. Early screening, ongoing surveillance, and accurate diagnosis are crucial for the elimination of cervical cancer. New screening guidelines for testing in asymptomatic healthy populations and management guidelines for managing abnormal results have been published by professional organizations. CONTENT: This guidance document addresses key questions related to cervical cancer screening and management including currently available cervical cancer screening tests and the testing strategies for cervical cancer screening. This guidance document introduces the most recently updated screening guidelines regarding age to start screening, age to stop screening, and frequencies of routine screening as well as risk-based management guidelines for screening and surveillance. This guidance document also summarizes the methodologies for the diagnosis of cervical cancer. Additionally, we propose a report template for human papilloma virus (HPV) and cervical cancer detection to facilitate interpretation of results and clinical decision-making. SUMMARY: Currently available cervical cancer screening tests include hrHPV testing and cervical cytology screening. The screening strategies can be primary HPV screening, co-testing with HPV testing and cervical cytology, and cervical cytology alone. The new American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology guidelines recommend variable frequencies of screening and surveillance based on risk. To implement these guidelines, an ideal laboratory report should include the indication for the test (screening, surveillance, or diagnostic workup of symptomatic patients); type of test (primary HPV screening, co-testing, or cytology alone); clinical history of the patient; and prior as well as current testing results.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.312 · 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