MAVARIC - a comparison of automation-assisted and manual cervical screening: a randomised controlled trial
Kitchener HC, Blanks R, Cubie H, Desai M, Dunn G, Legood R, Gray A, Sadique Z, Moss S on behalf of the MAVARIC Trial Study Group
Record ID 32010000272
English
Authors' objectives:
Cervical screening currently relies on manually read slides in which the cytoscreener scans the entire slide looking for abnormal cells. This study evaluated technology that assists reading cytology by automatically detecting abnormal fields of view on a slide and presenting these to a cytoscreener on an automated microscope. This could potentially achieve greater sensitivity and productivity, thus saving lives and achieving a more efficient use of the cytology workforce. This study had the following objectives:
•To determine the sensitivity of automation-assisted reading relative to manual reading.
•To determine any added productivity of automated reading.
•To estimate the comparative cost-effectiveness of automated and manual reading.
•To determine the reliability of ‘no further review’ (NFR) without any reading.
Authors' recommendations:
Study found that the significantly reduced sensitivity of automated reading combined with uncertainty over cost-effectiveness suggests no justification at present to recommend its introduction.
Details
Project Status:
Completed
Year Published:
2011
English language abstract:
An English language summary is available
Publication Type:
Not Assigned
Country:
England, United Kingdom
MeSH Terms
- Mass Screening
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Contact
Organisation Name:
NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
Contact Address:
NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK
Contact Name:
journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
Contact Email:
journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
Copyright:
2011 Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO