ArticleJournal of pathology and translational medicine2017
Comparison of Unsatisfactory Samples from Conventional Smear versus Liquid-Based Cytology in Uterine Cervical Cancer Screening Test.
Article in Journal of pathology and translational medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Conventional Pap Smear and Liquid-Based Cytology in the detection of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Cervical Cancer.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Quality of Cell Collected from the Cervix: Conventional versus Liquid-Based Cytology.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2026Observational
- Evaluation of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Cervical Cell Morphologies from Android Device-Captured Cytopathological Microscopic Images through Artificial Intelligence in Mainly Rural or Resource-Constraint Areas of India.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2026Article
- Poor Performance of Applicator Tampon-Based Self-Collection for Liquid-Based Cytology Among Women Attending a Tertiary Hospital in South Africa.Diagnostic cytopathology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of a Novel Fixative Solution for Liquid-Based Cytology in Diagnostic Cytopathology.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Role of p16/Ki67 Dual Staining in Cervical Cancer Screening.Current issues in molecular biology · 2023Review
- Method for preservation of DNA stability of liquid-based cytology specimens from a lung adenocarcinoma cell line.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021Article
- Automatic model for cervical cancer screening based on convolutional neural network: a retrospective, multicohort, multicenter study.Cancer cell international · 2021Article
- Current Status of and Perspectives on Cervical Cancer Screening in Korea.Journal of pathology and translational medicine · 2019Review
- Effects of an Additional Liquid Based Cytology Prepate on Cytological Diagnosis in High-Risk HPV Positive, PaP Test Negative Cases.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2019Article
- Cervical Cancer Screening Programs in Europe: The Transition Towards HPV Vaccination and Population-Based HPV Testing.Viruses · 2018Review
- Cervical Cancer Detection between Conventional and Liquid Based Cervical Cytology: a 6-Year Experience in Northern Bangkok ThailandAsian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2018Article
- 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
13 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCervical cytology for uterine cervical cancer screening has transitioned from conventional smear (CS) to liquid-based cytology (LBC), which has many advantages. The aim of this study was to compare the proportion of unsatisfactory specimens from CS versus LBC at multiple institutions including general hospitals and commercial laboratories.
methodsEach participating institution provided a minimum of 500 Papanicolaou (Pap) test results for analysis. Pap tests were classified according to the participating institution (commercial laboratory or general hospital) and the processing method (CS, ThinPrep, SurePath, or CellPrep). The causes of unsatisfactory results were classified as technical problems, scant cellularity, or complete obscuring factors.
resultsA total of 38,956 Pap test results from eight general hospitals and three commercial laboratories were analyzed. The mean unsatisfactory rate of LBC was significantly lower than that of CS (1.26% and 3.31%, p = .018). In the LBC method, samples from general hospitals had lower unsatisfactory rates than those from commercial laboratories (0.65% vs 2.89%, p = .006). The reasons for unsatisfactory results were heterogeneous in CS. On the other hand, 66.2% of unsatisfactory results in LBC were due to the scant cellularity.
conclusionsUnsatisfactory rate of cervical cancer screening test results varies according to the institution and the processing method. LBC has a significantly lower unsatisfactory rate than CS.
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.