MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399164950 · doi:10.1159/000539566

The Founding Pioneer Cytotechnologists: The Women Who Assisted George N. Papanicolaou, MD, PhD, Develop the Pap Test for Cervical Cancer Prevention

2024· review· en· W4399164950 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Elgert

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Cytologica · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical Medical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPapanicolaou stainMedicinePapanicolaou TestGynecologyCervical cancerTest (biology)Pap testFamily medicineCervical cancer screeningCancerInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The earliest cytotechnologists are largely unknown. SUMMARY: In 1943, the book "Diagnosis of Uterine Cancer by the Vaginal Smear" by Papanicolaou and Traut recognized several women who have largely faded from memory. While Mary Papanicolaou and Charlotte Street are familiar names, others like Alberta Kuder and Huldah Boerker, who inadvertently laid the groundwork for the field of cytotechnology, remain obscure. There were also women like Christine Rassias and Adele Reboul who did not receive recognition. Notably, Mrs. Lady Mary G. Papanicolaou, despite her significant contributions both in the lab and at home since 1914, was not acknowledged in her husband's work until the publication of his Atlas in 1954. KEY MESSAGE: These women set the benchmark for future cytotechnologists, unknowingly shaping the profession as we know it today.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa CytologicaSame topicHistorical Medical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207