The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Meta-analysis of Pap Test Accuracy
Abstract
A literature search identified 62 studies published by August 1992 comparing Papanicolaou (Pap) test results with histology. Critical appraisal revealed that 82% of these had potential for verification bias and that only 37% stated that cytology and histology were independently assessed. Estimates of sensitivity and specificity ranged from 11 to 99% and 14 to 97%, respectively, and were highly negatively correlated (r = -0.63). Meta-analysis was used to combine data from 59 studies to estimate the accuracy of the Pap test using a summary receiver operating characteristic curve and to examine the effect of study quality. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve suggests that the Pap test may be unable to achieve concurrently high sensitivity and specificity. For example, specificity in the 90-95% range corresponds to sensitivity in the 20-35% range. Pap test accuracy was not associated with reported study characteristics or dimensions of quality. Future primary studies should pay more attention to methodologic standards for the conduct and reporting of diagnostic test evaluations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic
McHugh, M. L. (2012) · Biochemia Medica · doi:10.11613/bm.2012.031 · Cited by 19,877
Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests.
Lijmer, J. G. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.11.1061 · Cited by 1,861
Nanda, K., McCrory, D. C., Myers, E. R., Bastian, L. A., Hasselblad, V., Hickey, J. D., & Matchar, D. B. (2000) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-132-10-200005160-00009 · Cited by 1,089
Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low- and middle-income developing countries.
(2001) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 724
Schiffman, M., Herrero, R., Hildesheim, A., Sherman, M. E., Bratti, M., Wacholder, S., Alfaro, M., Hutchinson, M., Morales, J., Greenberg, M. D., et al. (2000) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.283.1.87 · Cited by 540
Metadata
- Authors
- Fahey, M. T., Irwig, L., & Macaskill, P.
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1995-04-01
- Volume
- 141
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 680-689
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6256
- OpenAlex
- W1906037527
- Cited by
- 684
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Meta-analysis of Pap Test Accuracy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117485
- The paper
- Fahey, M. T., Irwig, L., & Macaskill, P. (1995). Meta-analysis of Pap Test Accuracy. American Journal of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117485
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.