Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Cytopathologyarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Cytopathology
Article . 2017 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
Cytopathology
Article . 2018
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Intra‐ and inter‐observer reproducibility of CINtec®PLUS in ThinPrep® cytology preparations

Authors: M. McMenamin; M. McKenna; A. McDowell; C. Dawson; R. McKenna;

Intra‐ and inter‐observer reproducibility of CINtec®PLUS in ThinPrep® cytology preparations

Abstract

BackgroundThis study evaluated the intra‐ and inter‐observer reproducibility of the dual‐stain biomarker, CINtec® PLUS cytology in ThinPrep® specimens, for improved specificity in the detection of cervical disease in women testing human papillomavirus (HPV) positive.MethodsA total of 972 cases of HPV‐positive women from a triage and primary HPV screening population were selected from an ongoing study evaluating the clinical performance of CINtec® PLUS cytology. For reproducibility analyses, three cytotechnologists rescreened sets of slides which they had previously reported themselves and which were previously reported by each of the other cytotechnologists. The original results of slides previously screened by each of the three cytotechnologists were also compared with the results of an expert reference evaluator.ResultsIntra‐ and inter‐observer agreement for paired evaluations between reviewers ranged from 82.8% to 94.9% (kappa 0.65‐0.91) and 89.2% to 93% (kappa 0.83‐0.88), respectively. Reproducibility analyses between the cytotechnologists and the reference evaluator revealed agreements ranging from 95.5% to 98% (kappa 0.89‐0.96).ConclusionEvaluation of the dual‐stain biomarker showed a high level of agreement across all evaluators suggesting that CINtec® PLUS cytology will perform well in the hands of cytotechnologists and pathologist reviewers and could be introduced into cellular pathology laboratories that employ ThinPrep® LBC with a minimum effort.

Keywords

Observer Variation, Cytodiagnosis, Humans, Reproducibility of Results, Female

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    14
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
14
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!