CitoFocus: Uma Plataforma para Colaboração e Aprendizado em Citopatologia
Abstract
The subjective and interpretative nature of the pap smear analysis requires a great deal of knowledge and experience from the responsible professional. Technology and the construction of tools to assist the cytopathologist can be useful in searching for excellence in diagnosis. Taking advantage of specialists' usual behavior, seeking support and discussion with other professionals, this work proposes the CitoFocus application as a collaborative environment aimed at discussing cases, with a focus on images and clinical information.References
Amaral, R. G., Manrique, E. J. C., Guimarães, J. V., Sousa, P. J. d., Mignoli, J. R. Q., Xavier, A. d. F., and Oliveira, A. (2008). Inuência da adequabilidade da amostra sobre a detecção das lesões precursoras do câncer cervical. Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetrícia, 30(11):556–560.
Baena, A., Guevara, E., Almonte, M., Arias-Stella, J., Sasieni, P., and Sanchez, G. (2017). Factors related to inter-observer reproducibility of conventional pap smear cytology: a multilevel analysis of smear and laboratory characteristics. Cytopathology, 28(3):192– 202.
Basu, P., Mittal, S., Vale, D. B., and Kharaji, Y. C. (2018). Secondary prevention of cervical cancer. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 47:73– 85.
Bosch, M., Rietveld-Scheffers, P., and Boon, M. (1992). Characteristics of false-negative smears tested in the normal screening situation. Acta cytologica, 36(5):711–716.
Ekong, D., Liu, F., Brown, G. T., Ghosh, A., and Fontelo, P. (2017). Evaluation of android smartphones for telepathology. Journal of pathology informatics, 8.
Gay, J., Donaldson, L., and Goellner, J. (1985). False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytologica, 29(6):1043–1046.
Koonmee, S., Bychkov, A., Shuangshoti, S., Bhummichitra, K., Himakhun, W., Karalak, A., and Rangdaeng, S. (2017). False-negative rate of papanicolaou testing: a national survey from the thai society of cytology. Acta cytologica, 61(6):434–440.
Miller, A. B., Nazeer, S., Fonn, S., Brandup-Lukanow, A., Rehman, R., Cronje, H., Sankaranarayanan, R., Koroltchouk, V., Syrjänen, K., Singer, A., et al. (2000). Report on consensus conference on cervical cancer screening and management. International Journal of Cancer, 86(3):440–447.
Mody, D. R., Davey, D. D., Branca, M., Raab, S. S., Schenck, U. G., Stanley, M. W., Wright, R., Arbyn, M., Beccati, D., Bishop, J. W., et al. (2000). Quality assurance and risk reduction guidelines. Acta cytologica, 44(4):496–507.
Nayar, R. and Wilbur, D. C. (2015). The Bethesda system for reporting cervical cytology: denitions, criteria, and explanatory notes. Springer.
Sahin, D., Hacisalihoglu, U. P., and Kirimlioglu, S. H. (2018). Telecytology: Is it possible with smartphone images? Diagnostic cytopathology, 46(1):40–46.
Siddegowda, R. B., DivyaRani, M., Natarajan, M., and Biligi, D. S. (2016). Inter-observer variation in reporting of pap smears. 5(3):PO22–PO25.
Silva, P. R. (2005). Principais causas que limitam ou tornam as amostras insatisfatórias que podem comprometer a análise dos exames citopatológicos no rastreamento do câncer do colo doútero. Revista Eletrônica de Farmácia, 2(2):190–193.
Tobias, A. H. G., Amaral, R. G., Diniz, E. M., and Carneiro, C. M. (2016). Indicadores de qualidade dos exames citopatológicos da rede pública em minas gerais, brasil. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, 38(2):65–70.
Zhao, C., Crothers, B. A., Tabatabai, Z. L., Li, Z., Ghofrani, M., Souers, R. J., Husain, M., Fan, F., Shen, R., Ocal, I. T., et al. (2017). False-negative interpretation of ade- nocarcinoma in situ in the college of american pathologists gynecologic pap education program. Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 141(5):666–670.
Baena, A., Guevara, E., Almonte, M., Arias-Stella, J., Sasieni, P., and Sanchez, G. (2017). Factors related to inter-observer reproducibility of conventional pap smear cytology: a multilevel analysis of smear and laboratory characteristics. Cytopathology, 28(3):192– 202.
Basu, P., Mittal, S., Vale, D. B., and Kharaji, Y. C. (2018). Secondary prevention of cervical cancer. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 47:73– 85.
Bosch, M., Rietveld-Scheffers, P., and Boon, M. (1992). Characteristics of false-negative smears tested in the normal screening situation. Acta cytologica, 36(5):711–716.
Ekong, D., Liu, F., Brown, G. T., Ghosh, A., and Fontelo, P. (2017). Evaluation of android smartphones for telepathology. Journal of pathology informatics, 8.
Gay, J., Donaldson, L., and Goellner, J. (1985). False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytologica, 29(6):1043–1046.
Koonmee, S., Bychkov, A., Shuangshoti, S., Bhummichitra, K., Himakhun, W., Karalak, A., and Rangdaeng, S. (2017). False-negative rate of papanicolaou testing: a national survey from the thai society of cytology. Acta cytologica, 61(6):434–440.
Miller, A. B., Nazeer, S., Fonn, S., Brandup-Lukanow, A., Rehman, R., Cronje, H., Sankaranarayanan, R., Koroltchouk, V., Syrjänen, K., Singer, A., et al. (2000). Report on consensus conference on cervical cancer screening and management. International Journal of Cancer, 86(3):440–447.
Mody, D. R., Davey, D. D., Branca, M., Raab, S. S., Schenck, U. G., Stanley, M. W., Wright, R., Arbyn, M., Beccati, D., Bishop, J. W., et al. (2000). Quality assurance and risk reduction guidelines. Acta cytologica, 44(4):496–507.
Nayar, R. and Wilbur, D. C. (2015). The Bethesda system for reporting cervical cytology: denitions, criteria, and explanatory notes. Springer.
Sahin, D., Hacisalihoglu, U. P., and Kirimlioglu, S. H. (2018). Telecytology: Is it possible with smartphone images? Diagnostic cytopathology, 46(1):40–46.
Siddegowda, R. B., DivyaRani, M., Natarajan, M., and Biligi, D. S. (2016). Inter-observer variation in reporting of pap smears. 5(3):PO22–PO25.
Silva, P. R. (2005). Principais causas que limitam ou tornam as amostras insatisfatórias que podem comprometer a análise dos exames citopatológicos no rastreamento do câncer do colo doútero. Revista Eletrônica de Farmácia, 2(2):190–193.
Tobias, A. H. G., Amaral, R. G., Diniz, E. M., and Carneiro, C. M. (2016). Indicadores de qualidade dos exames citopatológicos da rede pública em minas gerais, brasil. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, 38(2):65–70.
Zhao, C., Crothers, B. A., Tabatabai, Z. L., Li, Z., Ghofrani, M., Souers, R. J., Husain, M., Fan, F., Shen, R., Ocal, I. T., et al. (2017). False-negative interpretation of ade- nocarcinoma in situ in the college of american pathologists gynecologic pap education program. Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 141(5):666–670.
Published
2021-06-15
How to Cite
KELLER, Breno; GUIMARÃES, Thiago D.; MALAQUIAS, Pedro Igor de S.; FERREIRA, Gabriel M. dos S.; RESENDE, Mariana T.; CARNEIRO, Claudia M.; BIANCHI, Andrea G. C..
CitoFocus: Uma Plataforma para Colaboração e Aprendizado em Citopatologia. In: BRAZILIAN SYMPOSIUM ON COMPUTING APPLIED TO HEALTH (SBCAS), 21. , 2021, Evento Online.
Anais [...].
Porto Alegre: Sociedade Brasileira de Computação,
2021
.
p. 404-409.
ISSN 2763-8952.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbcas.2021.16083.
