Performance and reproducibility of gynecologic cytology interpretation using the FocalPoint system: results of the RODEO Study Team
To assess whether automated screening in the cytologic examination of Papanicolaou smear slides results in smaller margins of error than manual screening. We compared cytotechnologists' performance and reproducibility of manual and automated screening of 10,165 consecutive cervical cytology sli...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of clinical pathology 2013-10, Vol.140 (4), p.567-571 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 571 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 567 |
| container_title | American journal of clinical pathology |
| container_volume | 140 |
| creator | Stein, Maíra Degiovani Fregnani, José Humberto T G Scapulatempo, Cristovam Mafra, Allini Campacci, Natália Longatto-Filho, Adhemar |
| description | To assess whether automated screening in the cytologic examination of Papanicolaou smear slides results in smaller margins of error than manual screening.
We compared cytotechnologists' performance and reproducibility of manual and automated screening of 10,165 consecutive cervical cytology slides examined at Barretos Cancer Hospital using the FocalPoint system.
In total, 83% of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and greater were classified as quintiles 1 and 2; no high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and greater were observed in quintile 5. No statistically significant differences were found between manual and automated screening, using cervical biopsy specimens as the gold standard.
FocalPoint safely screened high-grade lesions, which can be valuable for high-workload routines. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1309/AJCPWL36JXMRESFH |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1434010734</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3129951241</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p239t-2f508f3134f46d71a60fea3871e76b482988ec907a473839afcdae8b7a4d88b53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkD1PwzAQhi0EglLYmZAlFpaAHbuxw4ZKS0FFrfgQbJXjXIpREhfbGTLzx3EFLNxw957u0au7Q-iEkgvKSH55fT9evs5Zdv_28Dh5ms520IDmnCVCpOkuGhBC0iSngh2gQ-8_CKGpJHwfHaSc8FGMAfpagqusa1SrAau2xA42zpadNoWpTeixrfC6b0Hb2q6NxroPW9Vj0wZwGwdBBWNb3HnTrnF4Bzy1WtVLG-fY9z5AcxU9fVcHv_XaEo-Lm8kCP4Wu7PEzqOYI7VWq9nD8W4foZTp5Hs-S-eL2bnw9TzYpy0OSViMiK0YZr3hWCqoyUoFiUlAQWcFlmksJOidCccEky1WlSwWyiH0pZTFiQ3T-4xsv_OzAh1VjvIa6Vi3Yzq8oZ5xQIhiP6Nk_9MN2ro3bRWqUs0zSmIfo9JfqigbK1caZRrl-9fde9g19o38N</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1459368159</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance and reproducibility of gynecologic cytology interpretation using the FocalPoint system: results of the RODEO Study Team</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Stein, Maíra Degiovani ; Fregnani, José Humberto T G ; Scapulatempo, Cristovam ; Mafra, Allini ; Campacci, Natália ; Longatto-Filho, Adhemar</creator><creatorcontrib>Stein, Maíra Degiovani ; Fregnani, José Humberto T G ; Scapulatempo, Cristovam ; Mafra, Allini ; Campacci, Natália ; Longatto-Filho, Adhemar ; RODEO Study Team From Barretos Cancer Hospital</creatorcontrib><description>To assess whether automated screening in the cytologic examination of Papanicolaou smear slides results in smaller margins of error than manual screening.
We compared cytotechnologists' performance and reproducibility of manual and automated screening of 10,165 consecutive cervical cytology slides examined at Barretos Cancer Hospital using the FocalPoint system.
In total, 83% of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and greater were classified as quintiles 1 and 2; no high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and greater were observed in quintile 5. No statistically significant differences were found between manual and automated screening, using cervical biopsy specimens as the gold standard.
FocalPoint safely screened high-grade lesions, which can be valuable for high-workload routines.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9173</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-7722</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1309/AJCPWL36JXMRESFH</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24045555</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Automation, Laboratory - instrumentation ; Automation, Laboratory - methods ; Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - classification ; Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - diagnosis ; Female ; Humans ; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Middle Aged ; Papanicolaou Test ; Reproducibility of Results ; Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - classification ; Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - diagnosis ; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - classification ; Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Vaginal Smears - instrumentation ; Vaginal Smears - methods ; Vaginal Smears - statistics & numerical data ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>American journal of clinical pathology, 2013-10, Vol.140 (4), p.567-571</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Society for Clinical Pathology Oct 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24045555$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stein, Maíra Degiovani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fregnani, José Humberto T G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scapulatempo, Cristovam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mafra, Allini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campacci, Natália</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longatto-Filho, Adhemar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RODEO Study Team From Barretos Cancer Hospital</creatorcontrib><title>Performance and reproducibility of gynecologic cytology interpretation using the FocalPoint system: results of the RODEO Study Team</title><title>American journal of clinical pathology</title><addtitle>Am J Clin Pathol</addtitle><description>To assess whether automated screening in the cytologic examination of Papanicolaou smear slides results in smaller margins of error than manual screening.
We compared cytotechnologists' performance and reproducibility of manual and automated screening of 10,165 consecutive cervical cytology slides examined at Barretos Cancer Hospital using the FocalPoint system.
In total, 83% of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and greater were classified as quintiles 1 and 2; no high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and greater were observed in quintile 5. No statistically significant differences were found between manual and automated screening, using cervical biopsy specimens as the gold standard.
FocalPoint safely screened high-grade lesions, which can be valuable for high-workload routines.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Automation, Laboratory - instrumentation</subject><subject>Automation, Laboratory - methods</subject><subject>Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - classification</subject><subject>Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - diagnosis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Papanicolaou Test</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - classification</subject><subject>Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - diagnosis</subject><subject>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - classification</subject><subject>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Vaginal Smears - instrumentation</subject><subject>Vaginal Smears - methods</subject><subject>Vaginal Smears - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0002-9173</issn><issn>1943-7722</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkD1PwzAQhi0EglLYmZAlFpaAHbuxw4ZKS0FFrfgQbJXjXIpREhfbGTLzx3EFLNxw957u0au7Q-iEkgvKSH55fT9evs5Zdv_28Dh5ms520IDmnCVCpOkuGhBC0iSngh2gQ-8_CKGpJHwfHaSc8FGMAfpagqusa1SrAau2xA42zpadNoWpTeixrfC6b0Hb2q6NxroPW9Vj0wZwGwdBBWNb3HnTrnF4Bzy1WtVLG-fY9z5AcxU9fVcHv_XaEo-Lm8kCP4Wu7PEzqOYI7VWq9nD8W4foZTp5Hs-S-eL2bnw9TzYpy0OSViMiK0YZr3hWCqoyUoFiUlAQWcFlmksJOidCccEky1WlSwWyiH0pZTFiQ3T-4xsv_OzAh1VjvIa6Vi3Yzq8oZ5xQIhiP6Nk_9MN2ro3bRWqUs0zSmIfo9JfqigbK1caZRrl-9fde9g19o38N</recordid><startdate>201310</startdate><enddate>201310</enddate><creator>Stein, Maíra Degiovani</creator><creator>Fregnani, José Humberto T G</creator><creator>Scapulatempo, Cristovam</creator><creator>Mafra, Allini</creator><creator>Campacci, Natália</creator><creator>Longatto-Filho, Adhemar</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201310</creationdate><title>Performance and reproducibility of gynecologic cytology interpretation using the FocalPoint system: results of the RODEO Study Team</title><author>Stein, Maíra Degiovani ; Fregnani, José Humberto T G ; Scapulatempo, Cristovam ; Mafra, Allini ; Campacci, Natália ; Longatto-Filho, Adhemar</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p239t-2f508f3134f46d71a60fea3871e76b482988ec907a473839afcdae8b7a4d88b53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Automation, Laboratory - instrumentation</topic><topic>Automation, Laboratory - methods</topic><topic>Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - classification</topic><topic>Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - diagnosis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Papanicolaou Test</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - classification</topic><topic>Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - diagnosis</topic><topic>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - classification</topic><topic>Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Vaginal Smears - instrumentation</topic><topic>Vaginal Smears - methods</topic><topic>Vaginal Smears - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stein, Maíra Degiovani</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fregnani, José Humberto T G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scapulatempo, Cristovam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mafra, Allini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Campacci, Natália</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Longatto-Filho, Adhemar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RODEO Study Team From Barretos Cancer Hospital</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of clinical pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stein, Maíra Degiovani</au><au>Fregnani, José Humberto T G</au><au>Scapulatempo, Cristovam</au><au>Mafra, Allini</au><au>Campacci, Natália</au><au>Longatto-Filho, Adhemar</au><aucorp>RODEO Study Team From Barretos Cancer Hospital</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance and reproducibility of gynecologic cytology interpretation using the FocalPoint system: results of the RODEO Study Team</atitle><jtitle>American journal of clinical pathology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Clin Pathol</addtitle><date>2013-10</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>140</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>567</spage><epage>571</epage><pages>567-571</pages><issn>0002-9173</issn><eissn>1943-7722</eissn><abstract>To assess whether automated screening in the cytologic examination of Papanicolaou smear slides results in smaller margins of error than manual screening.
We compared cytotechnologists' performance and reproducibility of manual and automated screening of 10,165 consecutive cervical cytology slides examined at Barretos Cancer Hospital using the FocalPoint system.
In total, 83% of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance and greater were classified as quintiles 1 and 2; no high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and greater were observed in quintile 5. No statistically significant differences were found between manual and automated screening, using cervical biopsy specimens as the gold standard.
FocalPoint safely screened high-grade lesions, which can be valuable for high-workload routines.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>24045555</pmid><doi>10.1309/AJCPWL36JXMRESFH</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0002-9173 |
| ispartof | American journal of clinical pathology, 2013-10, Vol.140 (4), p.567-571 |
| issn | 0002-9173 1943-7722 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1434010734 |
| source | Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Automation, Laboratory - instrumentation Automation, Laboratory - methods Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - classification Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - diagnosis Female Humans Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Middle Aged Papanicolaou Test Reproducibility of Results Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - classification Uterine Cervical Dysplasia - diagnosis Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - classification Uterine Cervical Neoplasms - diagnosis Vaginal Smears - instrumentation Vaginal Smears - methods Vaginal Smears - statistics & numerical data Young Adult |
| title | Performance and reproducibility of gynecologic cytology interpretation using the FocalPoint system: results of the RODEO Study Team |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T01%3A27%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20and%20reproducibility%20of%20gynecologic%20cytology%20interpretation%20using%20the%20FocalPoint%20system:%20results%20of%20the%20RODEO%20Study%20Team&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20clinical%20pathology&rft.au=Stein,%20Ma%C3%ADra%20Degiovani&rft.aucorp=RODEO%20Study%20Team%20From%20Barretos%20Cancer%20Hospital&rft.date=2013-10&rft.volume=140&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=567&rft.epage=571&rft.pages=567-571&rft.issn=0002-9173&rft.eissn=1943-7722&rft_id=info:doi/10.1309/AJCPWL36JXMRESFH&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3129951241%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1459368159&rft_id=info:pmid/24045555&rfr_iscdi=true |