| Title |
Performance characteristics of Pap test, VIA, VILI, HR-HPV testing, cervicography, and colposcopy in diagnosis of significant cervical pathology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virchows Archiv, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00428-012-1242-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Adhemar Longatto-Filho, Paulo Naud, Sophie FM Derchain, Cecília Roteli-Martins, Sílvio Tatti, Luciano Serpa Hammes, Luis Otavio Sarian, Mojca Eržen, Margherita Branca, Jean Carlos de Matos, Renata Gontijo, Marina Y. S. Maeda, Temístocles Lima, Silvano Costa, Stina Syrjänen, Kari Syrjänen |
| Abstract |
We sought to evaluate the performance of diagnostic tools to establish an affordable setting for early detection of cervical cancer in developing countries. We compared the performance of different screening tests and their feasibility in a cohort of over 12,000 women: conventional Pap smear, liquid-based cytology, visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), visual inspection with Iodine solution (VILI), cervicography, screening colposcopy, and high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) testing (HR-HPV) collected by physician and by self-sampling. HR-HPV assay collected by the physician has the highest sensitivity (80 %), but high unnecessary referrals to colposcopy (15.1 %). HR-HPV test in self-sampling had a markedly lower (57.1 %) sensitivity. VIA, VILI, and cervicography had a poor sensitivity (47.4, 55, and 28.6 %, respectively). Colposcopy presented with sensitivity of 100 % in detecting CIN2+, but the lowest specificity (66.9 %). Co-testing with VIA and VILI Pap test increased the sensitivity of stand-alone Pap test from 71.6 to 87.1 % and 71.6 to 95 %, respectively, but with high number of unnecessary colposcopies. Co-testing with HR-HPV importantly increased the sensitivity of Pap test (to 86 %), but with high number of unnecessary colposcopies (17.5 %). Molecular tests adjunct to Pap test seems a realistic option to improve the detection of high-grade lesions in population-based screening programs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 20 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 24 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 May 2015.
All research outputs
#6,378,944
of 22,664,644 outputs
Outputs from Virchows Archiv
#310
of 1,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,396
of 163,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virchows Archiv
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,644 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,934 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 163,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.