Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36925850›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in health services2022

Assessment of the implementation context in preparation for a clinical study of machine-learning algorithms to automate the classification of digital cervical images for cervical cancer screening in resource-constrained settings.

Delivette Castor, Rakiya Saidu, Rosalind Boa, Nomonde Mbatani, Tinashe E M Mutsvangwa, Jennifer Moodley, Lynette Denny, Louise Kuhn

Full text read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in health services, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

8 authors.

Delivette CastorDivision of Infectious Diseases, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, United States.
Rakiya SaiduDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Rosalind BoaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Nomonde MbataniDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Tinashe E M MutsvangwaDivision of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Human Biology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Jennifer MoodleyGroote Schuur Hospital and South African Medical Research Council, Gynaecology Cancer Research Centre, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Lynette DennyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Louise KuhnDepartment of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, United States.

Funding

Automated Digital Imaging for Cervical Cancer ScreeningR01CA254576 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI KUHN, LOUISE · 2020 to 2024
$2.6M
Automated Visual Evaluation for Cervical Cancer Screening in HIV-positive WomenR01CA250011 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN · PI KUHN, LOUISE, MBATANI, NOMONDE HAZEL · 2020 to 2024
$1.7M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA250011NCI NIH HHS R01 CA254576
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: We assessed the implementation context and image quality in preparation for a clinical study evaluating the effectiveness of automated visual assessment devices within cervical cancer screening of women living without and with HIV. Methods: We developed a semi-structured questionnaire based on three Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) domains; intervention characteristics, inner setting, and process, in Cape Town, South Africa. Between December 1, 2020, and August 6, 2021, we evaluated two devices: MobileODT handheld colposcope; and a commercially-available cell phone (Samsung A21ST). Colposcopists visually inspected cervical images for technical adequacy. Descriptive analyses were tabulated for quantitative variables, and narrative responses were summarized in the text. Results: Two colposcopists described the devices as easy to operate, without data loss. The clinical workspace and gynecological workflow were modified to incorporate devices and manage images. Providers believed either device would likely perform better than cytology under most circumstances unless the squamocolumnar junction (SCJ) were not visible, in which case cytology was expected to be better. Image quality ( Conclusion: Novel application of the CFIR early in the conduct of the clinical study, including assessment of image quality, highlight real-world factors about intervention characteristics, inner clinical setting, and workflow process that may affect both the clinical study findings and ultimate pace of translating to clinical practice. The application and augmentation of the CFIR in this study context highlighted adaptations needed for the framework to better measure factors relevant to implementing digital interventions.

Indexed as

Automated Visual EvaluationAutomated Visual Evaluation of the cervixcervical cancerCFIRCFIR frameworkdigital cervical-cancer screening implementation assessment cervical cancerimplementation science

Identifiers

PMID36925850
PMCPMC10012690

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read21
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.