A more accurate measure of the false-negative rate of papanicolaou smear screening is obtained by determining the false-negative rate of the rescreening process

Cancer

Volumn 81, Issue 5, 1997, Pages 272-276

  Renshaw, Andrew A ^a   DiNisco, Sheryl A ^a   Minter, Lori J ^a   Cibas, Edmund S ^a  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Cytology; Cytopathology; False negative rate; Gynecology; Papanicolaou smear; Statistics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PAPANICOLAOU TEST; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA;

CARCINOMA IN SITU; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0031586502     PISSN: 0008543X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971025)81:5<272::AID-CNCR3>3.0.CO;2-P     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Krieger PA. Strategies for reducing Papanicolaou smear screening errors. Principles derived from data and experience with quality control. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997; 121:277-81.
2. Renshaw AA. Analysis of error in calculating the false-negative rate in the interpretation of cervicovaginal smears: the need to review abnormal cases. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 1997; 81:264-71.
3. Davey DD. Quality and liability issues with the Papanicolaou smear. The problem of definition of errors and false-negative smears. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997; 121:267-9.
4. Krieger P, Naryshkin S. Random rescreening of cytologic smears: a practical and effective component of quality assurance programs in both large and small cytology laboratories. Acta Cytol 1994; 38:291-8.
5. Hindman WM. An effective quality control program for the cytology laboratory. Acta Cytol 1976; 20:233-8.
6. Hindman WM. A proposal for quality control in gynecologic cytology. Acta Cytol 1987; 31:384-5.
7. Hindman WM. An approach to the problem of false negatives in gynecologic cytologie screening. Acta Cytol 1989; 33:814-8.
8. Fowkes FGR. Diagnostic vigilance. Lancet 1986;xx:493-4.
9. Frable WJ. Does a zero standard of error exist for the Papanicolaou smear? Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997; 121:301-10.
10. Department of Health and Human Services. Improving the quality of clinician Pap smear technique and management, client Pap smear education, and the evaluation of Pap smear laboratory testing: a resource guide for Title X family planning projects. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1989.
11. Naryshkin S. The false-negative fraction for Papanicolaou smears. How often are "abnormal" smears not detected by a "standard" screening cytologist? Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997; 121:270-2.
12. Yobs AR, Plott AE, Hicklin MD, Coleman SA, Johnston WW, Ashton PR, et al. Retrospective evaluation of gynecologic cytodiagnosis II. Interlaboratory reproducibility as shown in rescreening large consecutive samples of reported cases. Acta Cytol 1987; 31:900-10.
13. Derman H. Quality and liability issues with the Papanicolaou smear. Lessons from the science of error prevention. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1997; 121:287-91.
14. Davey DD, Naryshkin S, Nielsen ML, Kline TS. Atypical squamous cells of undertermined significance: interlaboratory comparison and quality assurance monitors. Diagn Cytopathol 1994; 11:390-6.
15. Sidaway MK, Tabbara SO. Reactive change and atypical squamous cells of undertermined significance in Papanicolaou smears: a cytohistologic correlation. Diagn Cytopathol 1993; 9:423-9.
16. Cocchi V, Carretti D, Fanti S, Baldazzi P, Casotti MT, Piazza R, et al. Intralaboratory quality assurance in cervical/vaginal cytology: evaluation of intercytologist diagnostic reproducibility. Diagn Cytopathol 1997; 16:87-92.
17. Joste NE, Crum CP, Cibas ES. Cytologic/histologic correlation for quality control in cervicovaginal cytology. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 103:32-4.