{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,11]],"date-time":"2026-02-11T15:37:00Z","timestamp":1770824220453,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":26,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2006,7,12]],"date-time":"2006-07-12T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1152662400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":4241,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Diagnostic Cytopathology"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[1994,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cause of discrepancies between non\u2010correlating cytologic and histologic cervical samples. The biopsy results of 433 women examined colposcopically were compared to their referral cervical smears (RS). There was a discrepancy between the RS and the subsequent biopsy in 120 women (28%). One hundred of these 120 RS were available for review; and in each case, a reason for the discrepancy was established and classified as RS overcall, RS undercall, RS sampling error, or biopsy sampling error. Fifty\u2010one discrepant RS were overcalled. They were reported initially as condyloma (19), mild dysplasia (22), and moderate dysplasia (10). One RS was undercalled. Nine RS were not diagnostic of the biopsy\u2010proven lesion due to smear sampling error. The discrepancies in the remaining 39 cases were due to biopsy sampling error. Twenty\u2010one of these 39 cases had additional biopsies or smears that confirmed the presence of condyloma\/dysplasia, and 18 had negative follow\u2010up. In summary, discrepancies were a result of pathologists' interpretative error, predominantly overcalls, in 52% of non\u2010correlating cases, and smear or biopsy sampling error in the remaining 48%. Diagn Cytopathol 1994;11:343\u2013347. \u00a9 1994 Wiley\u2010Liss, Inc.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1002\/dc.2840110406","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2007,2,22]],"date-time":"2007-02-22T03:39:40Z","timestamp":1172115580000},"page":"343-347","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":10,"title":["Retrospective analysis of non\u2010correlating cervical smears and colposcopically directed biopsies"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"11","author":[{"given":"Mary K.","family":"Sidawy","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sumalee","family":"Siriaunkgul","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Andra R.","family":"Frost","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":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.298.6675.707"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/jcp.42.3.231"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/jcp.27.12.945"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_5_2","first-page":"794","article-title":"Intraobserver and interobserver variability in the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities in cervical smears","volume":"32","author":"Klinkhamer PJJM","year":"1988","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_6_2","first-page":"224","volume-title":"Comprehensive cytopathology","author":"Vooijs GP","year":"1991"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_7_2","first-page":"401","article-title":"Cytologic evaluation of the uterine cervix: factors influencing accuracy","volume":"36","author":"Koss LG","year":"1982","journal-title":"Pathologist"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/jcp.26.8.564"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_9_2","first-page":"900","article-title":"Retrospective evaluation of gynecologic cytodiagnosis: II. Interlaboratory reproducibility as shown in rescreening large consecutive samples of reported cases","volume":"31","author":"Yobs AR","year":"1987","journal-title":"Acta Cytol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0090-8258(89)90066-8"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_11_2","first-page":"168","article-title":"Koilocytotic atypia and underlying dysplasia","volume":"33","author":"Shepherd J","year":"1991","journal-title":"J Fam Pract"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_12_2","first-page":"832","article-title":"Morphometric analysis of dysplasia in cervical cone biopsy specimens in cases with false negative cytology","volume":"68","author":"Hartman B","year":"1986","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1989.tb02428.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00003081-198312000-00017"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1990.tb02575.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_16_2","first-page":"359","article-title":"Cervical conization findings in women with dysplastic cervical cytology and normal colposcopy","volume":"35","author":"Ramirez EJ","year":"1990","journal-title":"J Reprod Med"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_17_2","first-page":"815","article-title":"Value of repeat cytology at the time of colposcopy for the evaluation of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia on Papanicolaou smears","volume":"34","author":"Wheelock JB","year":"1989","journal-title":"J Reprod Med"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_18_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00006250-198606000-00004"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_19_2","first-page":"715","article-title":"Discrepancy of cervical cytology and colposcopic biopsy: is cervical conization necessary?","volume":"77","author":"McCord ML","year":"1991","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.296.6616.172"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.1980.tb04416.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_22_2","first-page":"333","article-title":"Comparison of colposcopy directed biopsies and cold knife conization of the cervix in patients with abnormal cytology","volume":"142","author":"Hovadhanakul P","year":"1976","journal-title":"Surg Gynecol Obstet"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_23_2","first-page":"168","article-title":"Colposcopic diagnosis of cervical neoplasia","volume":"41","author":"Stafl A","year":"1973","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_24_2","first-page":"609","article-title":"Behavior of moderate cervical dysplasia during long term follow\u2010up","volume":"61","author":"Nasiell K","year":"1983","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_25_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00006250-198605000-00012"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_26_2","first-page":"33","volume-title":"New concepts in gynecologic oncology","author":"Patten SF","year":"1966"},{"key":"e_1_2_1_27_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/1097-0142(196611)19:11<1635::AID-CNCR2820191130>3.0.CO;2-1"}],"container-title":["Diagnostic Cytopathology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fdc.2840110406","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/dc.2840110406","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,24]],"date-time":"2023-10-24T02:46:09Z","timestamp":1698115569000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/dc.2840110406"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[1994,12]]},"references-count":26,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[1994,12]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/dc.2840110406"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/dc.2840110406","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["8755-1039","1097-0339"],"issn-type":[{"value":"8755-1039","type":"print"},{"value":"1097-0339","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[1994,12]]}}}