{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,4]],"date-time":"2026-09-04T22:01:48Z","timestamp":1788559308195,"version":"build-2803163510"},"reference-count":15,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2013,1,29]],"date-time":"2013-01-29T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1359417600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Cancer Cytopathology"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,4]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>BACKGROUND:<\/jats:title><jats:p>Studies of the performance of the automated FocalPoint Guided Screening (FPGS) imaging system in gynecologic cytology screening relative to manual screening have yielded conflicting results. In view of this uncertainty, a validation study of the FPGS was conducted before its potential adoption in 2 large laboratories in Ontario.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS:<\/jats:title><jats:p>After an intense period of laboratory training, a cohort of 10,233 current and seeded abnormal slides were classified initially by FPGS. Manual screening and reclassification blinded to the FPGS results were then performed. Any adequacy and\/or cytodiagnostic discrepancy between the 2 screening methods subsequently was resolved through a consensus process (truth). The performance of each method's adequacy and cytodiagnosis vis\u2010a\u2010vis the truth was established. The sensitivity and specificity of each method at 4 cytodiagnostic thresholds (atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse [ASC\u2010US+], low\u2010grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse [LSIL+], high\u2010grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or worse [HSIL+], and carcinoma) were compared. The false\u2010negative rate for each cytodiagnosis was determined.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS:<\/jats:title><jats:p>The performance of FPGS in detecting carcinoma, HSIL+, and LSIL+ was no different from the performance of manual screening, but the false\u2010negative rates for LSIL and ASC\u2010US were higher with FPGS than with manual screening.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS:<\/jats:title><jats:p>The results from this validation study in the authors' laboratory environment provided no evidence that FPGS has diagnostic performance that differs from manual screening in detecting LSIL+, HSIL+, or carcinoma. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2013;121:189\u2013196. \u00a9 2013 American Cancer Society.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1002\/cncy.21271","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,1,29]],"date-time":"2013-01-29T11:42:34Z","timestamp":1359459754000},"page":"189-196","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":21,"title":["A validation study of the FocalPoint GS imaging system for gynecologic cytology screening"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"121","author":[{"given":"Terence J.","family":"Colgan","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Nereo","family":"Bon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Susan","family":"Clipsham","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Geoffrey","family":"Gardiner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jeff","family":"Sumner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Virginia","family":"Walley","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"C. Meg","family":"McLachlin","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,1,29]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_7_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.20656"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_3_2","volume-title":"The BD FocalPoint Slide Profiler","author":"BD Diagnostics","year":"2012"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_4_2","volume-title":"The Ontario Cervical Screening Program 2003\u20102008","author":"Cancer Care Ontario","year":"2012"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1309\/AJCP8VE7AWBZCVQT"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S1470-2045(10)70264-3"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_7_2","volume-title":"Accreditation Requirements and Guidance","author":"Quality Management Program\u2010Laboratory Services (QMP\u2010LS)","year":"2012"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_8_2","unstructured":"Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (formerly the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards [NCCLS]).A Framework for NCCLS Evaluation Protocols; A Report. NCCLS documentEP19\u2010R.Wayne PA:Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute;2009."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_9_2","volume-title":"Basic Statistical Analysis","author":"Sprinthall RC","year":"2003"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cncy.20196"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_11_2","volume-title":"BD FocalPoint GS Imaging System [product insert]","author":"BD Diagnostics","year":"2012"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_12_2","volume-title":"Recommended Code of Practice for Laboratories Participating in the UK Cervical Screening Programmes","author":"British Association for Cytopathology","year":"2012"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_13_2","volume-title":"Practice Guidelines for Medical Laboratory Technologists Practicing in Cytology","author":"College of Medical Laboratory Technologists of Ontario (CMTLO)","year":"2008"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3310\/hta15030"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/cncy.20187"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_16_2","volume-title":"Implementation of \u201cNo further review\u201d (NFR) using the BC FocalPoint Slide. Profiler. National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme Good Practice Guide No. 4","author":"Denton KJ","year":"2012"}],"container-title":["Cancer Cytopathology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fcncy.21271","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/cncy.21271","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,12]],"date-time":"2025-10-12T20:20:29Z","timestamp":1760300429000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/cncy.21271"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2013,1,29]]},"references-count":15,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,4]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/cncy.21271"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/cncy.21271","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1934-662X","1934-6638"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1934-662X","type":"print"},{"value":"1934-6638","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2013,1,29]]}}}