Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 22, 2026
qPCR Is a Sensitive and Rapid Method for Detection of Cytomegaloviral DNA in Formalin-fixed, Paraffin-embedded Biopsy Tissue
Published on: July 9, 2014
Comparison of false negative rates between 100% rapid review and 10% random full rescreening as internal quality
Benjamin Chi Kui Lee1, Sui Yue Lam, Todd Walker
1Department of Health, Public Health Laboratory Center, 382, Nam Cheong Street, Shek Kip Mei, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China. benjamin_lee@dh.hksarg
Objective:
To compare and contrast the 100% partial rapid review (RR) method against 10% randomly selected full rescreening to determine the better means of internal quality control (QC) by which the cervical screening laboratory should adopt.
Study Design:
A total of 4,150 conventional Pap smears reported as negative during 2003 were 100% rescreened rapidly in large field jumps. From this cohort, 415 (10%) were selected again randomly for full rescreening. The false negative rates (FNRs) were calculated and compared accordingly.
Results:
The 100% RR method reclassified 30 false negative (FN) cases, while the 10% random full rescreening reclassified only 5. The FNRs were calculated to be 8.2% and 12.9%, respectively. A chi2 test (p < 0.05) showed significant difference between the FNRs calculated by both methods.
Conclusion:
The 100% RR proved to be a better method for QC purpose in reducing the FNRs and detected more missing cases. This study is the first of its type from Hong Kong and confirms previous publications from elsewhere that 100% RR is a better method for internal QC in cervical cytology screening.
