{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2023,11,19]],"date-time":"2023-11-19T12:18:16Z","timestamp":1700396296112},"reference-count":20,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2006,7,12]],"date-time":"2006-07-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1152662400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":5001,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Diagnostic Cytopathology"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[1992,11]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>The purpose of the study is to correlate the accuracy of diagnosis of cervical smears with the presence\/absence of an endocervical component. The referral smears and the smears obtained during colposcopic examination of 84 patients with biopsy\u2010proven squamous lesions were evaluated for the presence of an endocervical component, and the cytologic interpretations were compared with the histologic findings. Of the 136 smears containing an endocervical component, 111 (81.6 percent) had good correlation with histology and 25 (18.4%) showed a discrepancy. Of the 30 smears lacking an endocervical component, 24 (80%) had good histologic correlation and 6 (20%) were discrepant. Our data showed no significant difference in the detection of squamous lesions in those smears with an endocervical component from those without. We conclude that, although the presence or absence of an endocervical component should be documented in the cytology report, its absence should not be an indication to report the cervical smears as unsatisfactory. Diagn Cylopathol 1992;8:567\u2010570. \u00a9 1992 Wiley\u2010Liss, Inc.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1002\/dc.2840080605","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2007,2,22]],"date-time":"2007-02-22T02:23:33Z","timestamp":1172111013000},"page":"567-570","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":11,"title":["Should we report cervical smears lacking endocervical component as unsatisfactory?"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"8","author":[{"given":"Mary K.","family":"Sidawy","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sana O.","family":"Tabbara","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Steven G.","family":"Silverberg","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2006,7,12]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_1_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"285","DOI":"10.1093\/ajcp\/61.2.285","article-title":"Standards of adequacy of cytologic examination of the female genital tract","volume":"61","author":"Gilbert FE","year":"1974","journal-title":"Am J Clin Pathol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_3_2","first-page":"225","article-title":"The significance of endocervical cells in the diagnosis of cervical epithelial changes","volume":"27","author":"Elias A","year":"1983","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"931","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1989.03430070079034","article-title":"The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical\/vaginal cytologic diagnoses","volume":"262","author":"National Cancer Institute Workshop","year":"1989","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_5_2","first-page":"1","article-title":"Bethesda gaining users","volume":"4","year":"1990","journal-title":"CAP Today"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/dc.2840010113"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/00016347709158352"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_8_2","first-page":"323","article-title":"Relationship between the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities and the composition of cervical smears","volume":"29","author":"Voojs PG","year":"1985","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_9_2","first-page":"251","article-title":"The influence of sample takers on the cellular composition of cervical smears","volume":"30","author":"Voojs PG","year":"1986","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9378(72)90912-X"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_11_2","first-page":"264","article-title":"Consequences of the introduction of combined spatula and Cytobrush sampling for cervical cytology. Improvements in smear quality and detection rates","volume":"30","author":"Boon ME","year":"1986","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_12_2","first-page":"734","article-title":"The screening Papanicolaou smear: Contribution of the endocervical brush","volume":"70","author":"Taylor PT","year":"1987","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/dc.2840060106"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_14_2","first-page":"849","article-title":"Efficacy of the Cytobrush versus the cotton swab in the collection of endocervical cells","volume":"33","author":"Kristensen GB","year":"1989","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_15_2","first-page":"792","article-title":"Standards of adequacy of cytologic examination of the female genital tract. Conclusions of study group on cytology","volume":"43","author":"Koss LG","year":"1974","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_16_2","first-page":"261","article-title":"The contribution of endocervical smears to cervical cancer detection","volume":"19","author":"Shingleton HM","year":"1975","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_17_2","first-page":"258","article-title":"Papanicolaou smears without endocervical cells. Are they inadequate?","volume":"30","author":"Kivlahan C","year":"1986","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_18_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0140-6736(91)90870-U"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_19_2","first-page":"318","article-title":"The cytologic diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix uteri and related lesions. II. Microinvasive adenocarcinoma","volume":"32","author":"Ayer B","year":"1988","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.300.6740.1622"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_21_2","first-page":"730","article-title":"Endocervical columnar cells and adequacy of cervical samples: Analysis of 43 discordant smears and cervical biopsies","volume":"33","author":"Detweiler RE","year":"1989","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"}],"container-title":["Diagnostic Cytopathology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fdc.2840080605","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/dc.2840080605","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,9,25]],"date-time":"2023-09-25T21:59:15Z","timestamp":1695679155000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/dc.2840080605"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[1992,11]]},"references-count":20,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[1992,11]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/dc.2840080605"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/dc.2840080605","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["8755-1039","1097-0339"],"issn-type":[{"value":"8755-1039","type":"print"},{"value":"1097-0339","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[1992,11]]}}}