NCI Bethesda System 2001 logo American Society of Cytopathology logo
 Main Page 
 Search By:
   Atlas Chapter 
   Atlas Figure # 
   Terminology Table 
   Keyword 
   Preparation Type 
   BIRP Images 
 Self-Test 
 Acknowledgments 
 Links 
 Feedback 

COMPUTER ASSISTED INTERPRETATION OF CERVICAL CYTOLOGY

  • The type of instrumentation used should be provided in the report.
  • Data generated from screening devices that are not intended for patient care, but may be used for internal laboratory quality assurance, should not be included in the report.
  • Whether or not the specimen was successfully processed by the device, regardless of the result, should be reported.
  • If the automated screening provides an interpretation of the specimen that replaces manual screening/review, then this result and any adequacy data derived from the computer assessment should be stated in the report.
  • If there is no manual screening, i.e. automated primary screening only, then, in general, no name should appear on the report that can be misconstrued as a person who examined the slide.
  • Results generated by the instrument must be reviewed and verified by a laboratorian with appropriate training and authorization. A record of who performed this data verification should be maintained as an internal laboratory record.
  • If a specimen is manually screened or reviewed following automated screening, then the results of both methods must be compared and any discrepancy reconciled. The name of anyone who examines a cervical cytology slide for the final report should be documented.

These recommendations are not intended to be all-inclusive; additional relevant information may be included in the report depending on the specific type of device employed.

Sample reports: Available in Bethesda Atlas (Solomon D., Nayar R. (editors). The Bethesda System for Reporting Cervical Cytology, Second Edition. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2004.)

Definitions of terms used in this site