PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

B Bellerose

Publications and source records attributed to B Bellerose.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1999

Subclassifying atypical squamous cells in Thin-Prep cervical cytology correlates with detection of high-risk human papillomavirus DNA.

Recent studies have proposed subclassifying ASCUS into "favor reactive" (ASFR), "not otherwise specified" (ASNOS), and "favor squamous intraepithelial lesion (SIL)" (ASFS). This study explored the reproducibility of these diagnoses with Thin-Prep cytology and their association with high-risk human papillomavirus DNA (HRHPV). Three pathologists and 1 cytotechnologist with 2 to 25 years of experience reviewed 144 Thin-Prep (Cytyc, Boxborough, MA) specimens previously diagnosed as normal, ASFR, ASNOS, ASFS, and SIL. Interobserver reproducibility was computed with the kappa statistic. The original laboratory diagnosis was compared with the presence of HRHPV types. Interobserver reproducibility for a normal or SIL diagnosis was very good (kappa = .68 and .63). Reproducibility for ASFR, ASNOS, and ASFS ranged from poor to fair (kappa = .21, .19, and .32). In a weighted analysis, kappa values for ASFR/ASNOS and ASFS/SIL were .36 and .62, respectively. HRHPV-positivity for preparations originally diagnosed as N, ASFR, ASNOS, ASFS, and SIL were 5.7%, 8.8%, 17.4%, 47.8%, and 54.5%, respectively. The difference in index of HRHPV for either N or ASFR and ASFS or SIL was significant (P < .001). Reproducibility for ASCUS is generally poor, but better reproducibility is obtained by combining ASFS with SIL and, to a lesser degree, ASNOS with ASFR. ASFS and SIL confer a similar index of HRHPV and merit similar management. ASFR may be managed with cytologic follow-up; but this may depend upon the individual laboratory. HPV testing, in conjunction with cytologic and biopsy follow-up, appears useful for estimating the significance of ASCUS subgroups in laboratory practice.

DNA, Viral↗
PubMed1978

Interference and the persistence of articulatory responses.

An experimental test of the effect of phonological interference on short-term recall was conducted using non-English phonological sequences which were easily pronounceable. Subjects were normal speaking and normal hearing third-grade English speaking children. Experimental subjects produced the phonologically inadmissible [3a], [u'mI], [vepsilon], and control subjects produced the phonologically allowable [d3a], [u'mî], [veI]. Following a retention interval of 30 sec, one free recall trial was administered. Experimental subjects correctly recalled significantly less often than control subjects, suggesting that phonological rules can effect a decrement in short-term recall for phonetic units which are easy to pronounce.

Attention↗
PubMed1975

Self-retrieval and articulatory retention.

The effect of training in self-retrieval on articulatory recall was examined. Elementary school children practiced the syllables /ciks/ and /colt/ under two conditions: imitation and self-retrieval. In the latter condition subjects were asked to say the test object rather than to imitate its name. Over intervals of one day and five days there was no difference in retention as a function of the type of pretraining. Imitative responses decayed little over time and were, in general, always higher than self-retrieval responses regardless of the type of training during acquisition (self-retrieval or imitation).

Child↗
PubMedDate not supplied

False negative rate of cervical cytologic smear screening as determined by rapid rescreening.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of the false negative rate (FNR) of cervical cytologic smear screening by rapid rescreening. STUDY DESIGN: A test set of 401 cases (311 originally diagnosed as negative, 74 as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance [ASCUS], 14 as low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [LSIL] and 2 as high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion [HSIL]) were rapidly (30 seconds each) rescreened by five cytotechnologists with no prior experience in rapid rescreening, and the FNRs of rapid rescreening and primary screening were determined. These results were compared with each other and with the FNR of primary screening as determined by routine rescreening of all cases with no time limit. RESULTS: All five observers detected a different group of abnormal cases; only 9% of all cases originally diagnosed as ASCUS or worse and 43% of all cases diagnosed as LSIL or worse were detected by all five observers. Nevertheless, using ASCUS as the threshold for an abnormal result, the FNR of rapid rescreening fell into a relatively narrow range, 61-74% (mean, 68.2 +/- 5.0); using LSIL as the threshold resulted in FNRs of rapid rescreening between 25% and 38% (30.0 +/- 4.7). Each observer, using rapid rescreening, detected between one and three false negative cases; routine rescreening of all cases without a time limit detected five cases. The FNR of cervical cytologic smear screening, as determined by rapid rescreening, was 18.4 +/- 6.1% as compared with 14.8% by routine rescreening without a time limit. CONCLUSION: The FNR of rapid rescreening is relatively reproducible even though the individual cases identified varied between reviewers. The FNR of rapid rescreening is similar to that of routine rescreening. Rapid prescreening may be the most logistically simple method to determine the true FNR of a laboratory.

Carcinoma in Situ↗