ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2016
Comparison of Classical and Secondary Cytologic Criteria Relative to Hybrid Capture for Diagnosing Cervical-vaginal Infection by Human Papillomavirus.
Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of the classic Meisels cytologic criteria and the Schneider secondary criteria relative to the hybrid capture method for diagnosing HPV infection.
methodsThis was a retrospective study performed at a public university hospital. A total of 41 patients with a cytologic diagnosis of HPV infection and 40 HPV-negative patients were selected for review of the cervical-vaginal smears seeking to classical and secondary criteria. A single pathologist reviewed the slides in search of the criteria. The classical and secondary cytologic criteria were compared with the hybrid capture for diagnosing HPV infection. Bartleti test was applied for the age analysis, and Fisher's exact test was used to compare proportions. The tests were considered significant when the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis was less than 5% (p < 0.05).
resultsThe Meisels criteria were less sensitive (34.0%) than the secondary Schneider criteria (57.5%) when compared with the hybrid capture (p < 0.0001), although the specificity of the former criteria was non-significantly higher (91.2% and 67.7%, respectively). In cases of moderate or intense inflammation, the sensitivity and specificity of the Schneider criteria were decreased, 33.3% and 50.0% respectively (p = 0.0115).
conclusionsCompared with hybrid capture for diagnosis of HPV infection, the sensitivity of the secondary Schneider criteria was higher than the classical Meisels criteria.Moderate or intense inflammation reduces the sensitivity and specificity of the secondary Schneider criteria for diagnosing HPV infection using the hybrid capture as the gold standard.
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.