ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2016
Quality Indicators of Cervical Cytopathology Tests in the Public Service in Minas Gerais, Brazil.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trend analysis of the quality indicators for the Brazilian cervical cancer screening programme by region and state from 2006 to 2013.BMC cancer · 2018Article
- Organized, Population-based Cervical Cancer Screening Program: It Would Be a Good Time for Brazil Now.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe objective of this study is to assess the performance of cytopathology laboratories providing services to the Brazilian Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS) in the State of Minas Gerais, Brazil.
methodsThis descriptive study uses data obtained from the Cervical Cancer Information System from January to December 2012. Three quality indicators were analyzed to assess the quality of cervical cytopathology tests: positivity index, percentage of atypical squamous cells (ASCs) in abnormal tests, and percentage of tests compatible with high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSILs). Laboratories were classified according to their production scale in tests per year ≤ 5,000; from 5,001 to 10,000; from 10,001 to 15,000; and ≥ 15,001. Based on the collection of variables and the classification of laboratories according to production scale, we created and analyzed a database using Microsoft Office Excel 97-2003.
resultsIn the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais, 146 laboratories provided services to the SUS in 2012 by performing a total of 1,277,018 cervical cytopathology tests. Half of these laboratories had production scales ≤ 5,000 tests/year and accounted for 13.1% of all tests performed in the entire state; in turn, 13.7% of these laboratories presented production scales of > 15,001 tests/year and accounted for 49.2% of the total of tests performed in the entire state. The positivity indexes of most laboratories providing services to the SUS in 2012, regardless of production scale, were below or well below recommended limits. Of the 20 laboratories that performed more than 15,001 tests per year, only three presented percentages of tests compatible with HSILs above the lower limit recommended by the Brazilian Ministry of Health.
conclusionThe majority of laboratories providing services to the SUS in Minas Gerais presented quality indicators outside the range recommended by the Brazilian Ministry of Health.
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.