ArticleRevista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia2022
Association of Swede Score and 2011 IFCPC Nomenclature in Women with Abnormal Cytology.
Article in Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07012356 (Does The Type of Hr-HPV and Multiple HPV Carrier Status Increase The Effectiveness of The Colposcopy in Diagnosing Preinvasive Lesions Using The Swede Score and The 2011 IFCPC Nomenclature?), which is not on this 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.
Does The Type of Hr-HPV and Multiple HPV Carrier Status Increase The Effectiveness of The Colposcopy in Diagnosing Preinvasive Lesions Using The Swede Score and The 2011 IFCPC Nomenclature?
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of the swede score in optimizing triage of visual inspection with acetic acid positive women: cross-sectional evidence from Bangladesh.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- A Prospective Study to Assess the Utility of Artificial Intelligence-driven Cervical Screening Using Smart Scope versus Conventional Method.Journal of mid-life healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the association between two colposcopic indices, the Swede score and the 2011 International Federation of Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy (IFCPC) Nomenclature as well as to determine the efficacy of the Swede score with cutoffs of 7 and 8.
methodsIn the present cross-sectional pilot study, 34 women who had at least 1 colposcopy-directed biopsy due to abnormal cytology were enrolled. The colposcopic findings were scored by both the Swede score and the 2011 IFCPC Nomenclature and were compared with each other. The Kappa coefficient and the McNemar test were used. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (NPV and PPV, respectively) were calculated, as well as the effectiveness with cutoffs of 7 and 8 in identifying cervical intraepithelial neoplasm (CIN) 2+ when using the Swede score.
resultsThe correlation between the 2 colposcopic indices was 79.41%. The Kappa coefficient and the McNemar p-value were 0.55 and 0.37, respectively. The IFCPC Nomenclature had sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV of 85.71, 55.00, 67.64, 57.14, and 84.61%, respectively. The Swede score had sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV, and NPV of 100, 63.15, 79.41, 68.18, and 100%, respectively. A Swede score cutoff of 7 for CIN 2+ detection had a specificity of 94.73%, while with a cutoff of 8 it increased to 100%. The sensitivity for both values was 60%. The PPV and NPV for cutoffs of 7 and 8 were 90 and 75 and 100 and 76%, respectively.
conclusionAlthough both colposcopic indices have good reproducibility, the Swede score showed greater accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in identifying CIN 2 + , especially when using a cutoff of 8.
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.