ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2019
Machine Learning Interpretation of Extended Human Papillomavirus Genotyping by Onclarity in an Asian Cervical Cancer Screening Population.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and management of gynecologic cancer.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Review
- Review
- Development, validation, and clinical application of a machine learning model for risk stratification and management of cervical cancer screening based on full-genotyping hrHPV test (SMART-HPV): a modelling study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence and visual inspection in cervical cancer screening.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2023Article
- Optical imaging for early detection of cervical cancer: state of the art and perspectives.Journal of biomedical optics · 2023Review
- Clinical microbiology in detection and identification of emerging microbial pathogens: past, present and future.Emerging microbes & infections · 2022Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Cervical Cancer Screening and Diagnosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- [Artificial intelligence and its applications in medicine II: Current importance and practical applications].Atencion primaria · 2021Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed (i) to compare the performance of the BD Onclarity human papillomavirus (HPV) assay with the Cobas HPV test in identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2/3 or above (CIN2/3+) in an Asian screening population and (ii) to explore improving the cervical cancer detection specificity of Onclarity by machine learning. We tested 605 stratified random archived samples of cervical liquid-based cytology samples with both assays. All samples had biopsy diagnosis or repeated negative cytology follow-up. Association rule mining (ARM) was employed to discover coinfection likely to give rise to CIN2/3+. Outcome classifiers interpreting the extended genotyping results of Onclarity were built with different underlying models. The sensitivities (Onclarity, 96.32%; Cobas, 95.71%) and specificities (Onclarity, 46.38%; Cobas, 45.25%) of the high-risk HPV (hrHPV) components of the two tests were not significantly different. When HPV16 and HPV18 were used to further interpret hrHPV-positive cases, Onclarity displayed significantly higher specificity (Onclarity, 87.10%; Cobas, 80.77%). Both hrHPV tests achieved the same sensitivities (Onclarity, 90.91%; Cobas, 90.91%) and similar specificities (Onclarity, 48.46%; Cobas, 51.98%) when used for triaging atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Positivity in both HPV16 and HPV33/58 of the Onclarity channels entails the highest probability of developing CIN2/3+. Incorporating other hrHPVs into the outcome classifiers improved the specificity of identifying CIN2/3 to up to 94.32%. The extended genotyping of Onclarity therefore can help to highlight patients having the highest risk of developing CIN2/3+, with the potential to reduce unnecessary colposcopy and negative psychosocial impact on women receiving the reports.
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.