ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2014
Performance of a low cost magnifying device, Magnivisualizer, versus colposcope for detection of pre-cancer and cancerous lesions of uterine cervix.
Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of handheld tools in lieu of colposcopy for cervical neoplasia and female genital schistosomiasis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2021Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of hand-held colposcope (Gynocular) in comparison with standard colposcope in patients with abnormal cervical cytology or visual inspection with acetic acid positivity: a cross over randomized controlled study.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2023Article
- Looking Beyond VIA to Improve Cervical Cancer Screening in Low Resource Settings.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2022Article
- Comparative Study of Smart Scope® Visual Screening Test with Naked Eye Visual Screening and Pap Test.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2020Observational
- Computer-Aided Diagnosis of Label-Free 3-D Optical Coherence Microscopy Images of Human Cervical Tissue.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2019Article
- Ultrahigh-resolution optical coherence microscopy accurately classifies precancerous and cancerous human cervix free of labeling.Theranostics · 2018Article
- Cervical cancer screening in a low-resource setting: a pilot study on an HPV-based screen-and-treat approach.Cancer medicine · 2017Article
- A Smartphone-Based Approach for Triage of Human Papillomavirus-Positive Sub-Saharan African Women: A Prospective Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2017Article
- Magnivisualizer in the early detection of cervical neoplasia.Journal of gynecologic oncology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the performance of a low cost magnifying device (Magnivisualizer) compared to a standard optical colposcope for detection of precancerous and cancerous lesions of the uterine cervix.
methodsA total of 659 consecutive symptomatic women attending a gynecologic outpatient clinic underwent unaided visual inspection followed by cytology, visual inspection of the cervix using 5% acetic acid (VIA), and VIA under magnification (VIAM) with the Magnivisualizer. All women, independently of test results, were referred for colposcopic examination. Colposcopic-directed biopsies were obtained from all positive lesions and compared to positive VIAM cases.
resultsThe detection rate for VIA positive lesions was 12% (134/659), while it was 29% for VIAM positive lesions (191/659). The sensitivities of detection of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) 2 and higher lesions were 61.7% for VIA, 88.3% for VIAM, and 86.7% for colposcopy, with a specificity of 58.5% for VIA, 55.8% for VIAM, and 90.4% for colposcopy. The performance of colposcopy and VIAM was moderate (κ, 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.54) for detection of CIN 1 and higher lesions and excellent (κ, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.94) for detection of CIN 2 and higher lesions.
conclusionIn low resource settings, where colposcopic facilities are not available at the community level, a simple low-cost, handheld Magnivisualizer can be considered a valid option for detection of cervical precancerous and cancerous lesions. However, it cannot replace traditional colposcopy because it has a low specificity that results in many unnecessary biopsies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.