A comparison of the accuracy of liquid cytology versus conventional screening: a meta-analysis of split-sample studies

David Epstein, Antonio Olry Labry Lima, Leticia García Mochón, Jaime Espín Balbino and Javier Esquivias

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, 2014, vol. 177, issue 1, 153-168

Abstract: type="main" xml:id="rssa12005-abs-0001">

The aim of the paper is to compare the accuracy and effectiveness of liquid-based versus conventional cytology when used as part of a process of population screening to reduce the incidence of invasive cervical cancer. Data from split-sample studies were analysed by using a hierarchical Bayesian multiparameter evidence synthesis model. Predictions of sensitivity and specificity were derived without having a procedure to detect the lesions. Results suggest that the specificity of both tests is high, such that less than 1% of normal samples are expected to be misdiagnosed. However, the sensitivity may be lower, with around 81% of lesions expected to be correctly diagnosed in smear tests and 88% in liquid-based cytology.

Date: 2014
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/rssa.2013.177.issue-1 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jorssa:v:177:y:2014:i:1:p:153-168

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://ordering.onli ... 1111/(ISSN)1467-985X

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A is currently edited by A. Chevalier and L. Sharples

More articles in Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A from Royal Statistical Society Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().