Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34112812›Full record

ArticleScientific data2021

Cric searchable image database as a public platform for conventional pap smear cytology data.

Mariana T Rezende, Raniere Silva, Fagner de O Bernardo, Alessandra H G Tobias, Paulo H C Oliveira, Tales M Machado, Caio S Costa, Fatima N S Medeiros, Daniela M Ushizima, Claudia M Carneiro and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readDataset
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mariana T Rezende *Graduate Program in Biotechnology, Biological Sciences Research Center (NUPEB), Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil. mariana.trevisan@aluno.ufop.edu.br.ORCID 0000-0002-9514-9312
Raniere Silva *Computing Department, Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil. raniere.gcs@aluno.ufop.edu.br.ORCID 0000-0002-8381-3749
Fagner de O BernardoComputing Department, Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1798-6246
Alessandra H G TobiasCytology Laboratory, Clinical Analysis Department, Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-5440-5885
Paulo H C OliveiraComputing Department, Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1206-1340
Tales M MachadoComputing Department, Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-0603-823X
Caio S CostaComputing Department, Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1838-1457
Fatima N S MedeirosTeleinformatics Engineering Department, Federal University of Ceará, Fortaleza, CE, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3075-8771
Daniela M UshizimaComputational Research Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7363-9468
Claudia M CarneiroGraduate Program in Biotechnology, Biological Sciences Research Center (NUPEB), Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6002-857X
Andrea G C BianchiComputing Department, Federal University of Ouro Preto, Ouro Preto, MG, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-7949-1188
Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto · BRLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory · USUniversidade Federal do Ceará · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Amidst the current health crisis and social distancing, telemedicine has become an important part of mainstream of healthcare, and building and deploying computational tools to support screening more efficiently is an increasing medical priority. The early identification of cervical cancer precursor lesions by Pap smear test can identify candidates for subsequent treatment. However, one of the main challenges is the accuracy of the conventional method, often subject to high rates of false negative. While machine learning has been highlighted to reduce the limitations of the test, the absence of high-quality curated datasets has prevented strategies development to improve cervical cancer screening. The Center for Recognition and Inspection of Cells (CRIC) platform enables the creation of CRIC Cervix collection, currently with 400 images (1,376 × 1,020 pixels) curated from conventional Pap smears, with manual classification of 11,534 cells. This collection has the potential to advance current efforts in training and testing machine learning algorithms for the automation of tasks as part of the cytopathological analysis in the routine work of laboratories.

Indexed as

Internet UsePapanicolaou TestCervix UteriEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMachine LearningUterine Cervical Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID34112812
PMCPMC8192784
OpenAlexW3169873017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.