Surrogate indicators of sensitivity in gynecologic cytology: Can they be used to improve the measurement of sensitivity in the laboratory

CytoJournal

Volumn 6, Issue , 2009, Pages

  Renshaw, Andrew ^a   Brimo, Fadi ^b   Auger, Manon ^b  

^a Comprehensive Pathology Associates ^*  (United States)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY HEALTH CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Diagnostic accuracy; gynecological cytology; improvement; performance; quality control; rapid pre screening; routine screening; sensitivity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CYTOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; SCREENING TEST;

EID: 77956587343     PISSN: 09745963     EISSN: 17426413     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4103/1742-6413.56359     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. 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.
2. Renshaw AA, Lezon KM, Wilbur DC. The human false negative rate of rescreening in a two arm prospective clinical trial. Cancer Cytopathol 2001;93:106-10.
3. Renshaw AA. Measuring sensitivity in gynecologic cytology: A review. Cancer Cytopathol 2002;96:210-7.
4. Renshaw AA, Cronin JA, Minter LJ, Whitman T, Jiroutek M, Cibas ES. Performance characteristics of rapid (30 second) prescreening: Implications for calculating the false-negative rate and comparison with other quality assurance techniques. Am J Clin Pathol 1999;111:517-22.
5. Brooke D, Dudding N, Sutton J. Rapid (partial) prescreening of cervical smears: The quality control method of choice? Cytopathology 2002;13:191-9.
6. Smith J, Nicholas D, Bod K, Deacon-Smith R. Rapid pre-screening: A validated quality assurance measure in cervical cytology. Cytopathology 2003;14:275-80.
7. Deschenes M, Renshaw AA, Auger M. Measuring the significance of workload on the performance of cytotechnologists in gynecologic cytology: A study using rapid prescreening. Cancer Cytopathol 2008;114:149-54.
8. Djemli A, Khetani K, Auger M. Rapid prescreening of Papanicolaou smears: A practical and efficient qulaity control strategy. Cancer 2006;108:21-6.
9. Djemli A, Khetani K, Case B, Auger M. Correlation of cytotechnologists′ parameters with their performance in rapid prescreening of Papanicolaou smears. Cancer Cytopathol 2006;108:306-10.
10. Tavares SB, Sousa NL, Manrique C, Albuquerque ZB, Zeferino LC, Amaral RG. Comparison of the performance of rapid prescreening, 10% random review and clinical risk criteria as methods of internal quality control in cervical cytopathology. Cancer Cytopathol 2008;114:165-70.
11. Tavares SB, de Sousa NL, Manrique EJ, de Albuquerque ZB, Zeferino LC, Amaral RG. Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal qulaity control in a cervical screening program. Cytopathology 2008;19:254-9.
12. Brimo F, Renshaw AA, Deschenes M, Charbonneau M, Auger M. Improvement in routine screening performance of cytotechnologists over time: A study using rapid pre-screening. Cancer Cytopathol 2009 in press.
13. Renshaw AA. Strategies for improving gynecologic cytology screening. Cancer Cytopathol 2009 in press.
14. Renshaw AA, DiNisco SA, Minter LJ, Cibas ES. A more accurate measure of the false negative rate of Pap smear screening is obtained by determining the false negative rate of the rescreening process. Cancer Cytopathol 1997;81:272-6.
15. Renshaw AA. Analysis of error in calculating the false negative rate for interpretation of cervicovaginal smears: The need to review abnormal cases. Cancer Cytopathol 1997;81:264-71.
16. Pitman MB, Cibas ES, Powers CN, Renshaw AA, Frable WJ. Reducing or eliminating use of the category of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance decreases the diagnostic accuracy of the Papanicolaou smear. Cancer Cytopathol 2002;96:128-34.
17. Renshaw AA, Auger M, Birdsong G, Cibas ES, Henry M, Hughes JH, et al. ASC/SIL Ratio for cytotechnologists: A survey of its utility in clinical practice. Cancer Cytopathol 2009 in press.
18. 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.
19. Davey DD, Nielsen ML, Naryshkin S, Robb JA, Cohen T, Kline TS. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: Current laboratory practices of participants in the College of American Pathologists interlaboratory comparison program in cervicovaginal cytology. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1996;120:440-4.