Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36268084›Full record

ArticleJournal of pathology informatics2022

BestCyte® Cell Sorter Imaging System: Primary and adjudicative whole slide image rescreening review times of 500 ThinPrep Pap test thin-layers - An intra-observer, time-surrogate analysis of diagnostic confidence potentialities.

Nikolaos Chantziantoniou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pathology informatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

1 author.

Nikolaos ChantziantoniouCellPathology Plus, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The novel Artificial Intelligence-driven BestCyte® Cell Sorter Imaging System (BestCyte) enables hybrid digital screening through classification and sorting of tiles depicting cells in 8 galleries or whole slide image (WSI) reviews. Objectives: (1) Analyze expenditures of time (minutes) for primary BestCyte cell sorter screening and adjudicative WSI rescreening of 500 blinded, randomized ThinPrep thin-layers to determine review times per Bethesda nomenclature; (2) Analyze review times for NILM qualifier diagnoses reflecting increasing interpretive complexity (i.e., Inflammation, Reactive/Repair, Bacterial cytolysis, Bacterial vaginosis, Atrophy, and Atrophic vaginitis); (3) Challenge accuracy of primary diagnoses (Downgraded, Upheld, and Upgraded) following adjudicative WSI rescreening to assess correlated review times as surrogate indicators of diagnostic confidence in BestCyte functionality (i.e., learning curve); and (4) Correlate primary and adjudicative diagnoses to calculate intra-observer reproducibility Kappa coefficients per Bethesda nomenclature. Results: Of 500 thin-layers, the mean [primary/adjudicative rescreening review times (minutes)] were: Overall study [1.38/3.94], NILM [1.23/3.02], ASCUS [1.18/2.53], ASC-H [1.73/4.86], AGUS [1.84/6.34], LSIL [1.49/4.16], HSIL [1.52/4.10], CA [0.65/2.57]. Of 500 primary Bethesda diagnoses: 2 (0.40%) downgraded; 483 (96.6%) upheld; 15 (3.00%) upgraded after adjudicative WSI rescreening. Of 354 NILM diagnoses: 0 downgraded; 344 (97.2%) upheld; 10 (2.82%) upgraded. Of 34 ASCUS diagnoses: 2 (5.88%) downgraded; 28 (82.4%) upheld; 4 (11.8%) upgraded. Of 17 ASC-H diagnoses: 0 downgraded; 16 (94.1%) upheld; 1 (5.88%) upgraded. Of AGUS (n=1), LSIL (n=24), HSIL (n=52), CA (n=1), UNSAT (n=17): 100% upheld. Kappa coefficients with 95% (Confidence Intervals): Overall study 0.9305 (0.8983-0.9627), NILM 0.9429 (0.9110-0.9748), ASCUS 0.8378 (0.7393-0.9363), ASC-H 0.9112 (0.8113-0.9999), AGUS 1.0 (1.0-1.0), LSIL 0.9189 (0.8400-0.9978), HSIL 0.9894 (0.9685-0.9999), CA 1.0 (1.0-1.0), UNSAT 1.0 (1.0-1.0). Primary BestCyte cell image review time trends for NILM, ASCUS, LSIL, and HSIL, revealed plateaus relative to decreasing respective adjudicative WSI rescreening times. Conclusions: Given innovative robustness, BestCyte accommodates interpretive fundamentals, enabling shorter ThinPrep thin-layer review times with optimal intra-observer concordance per Bethesda nomenclature through classifying, ranking, sorting, and displaying clinically relevant cells efficiently in galleries. BestCyte fosters continuously optimizing diagnostic confidence learning curves; may supplant manual microscopy for primary screening.

Indexed as

Adjudicative whole slide image rescreeningArtificial Intelligence-based cytologyBestCyte cell sorter imaging systemIntra-observer reproducibilityReview timesVirtual primary screening

Identifiers

PMID36268084
PMCPMC9576977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.