ReviewiScience2026
Artificial intelligence for colposcopic and cytological image analysis in early cervical cancer detection.
Review in iScience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Additional Diagnostic Yield of Endocervical Curettage in Type 3 Transformation Zone for High-Grade Cervical Lesions: A Retrospective Analysis by Human Papillomavirus Genotype.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping cervical cancer screening by automating interpretation of cytology, colposcopic, and related imaging to improve early detection, especially in low- and middle-income countries. This review synthesizes advances in preprocessing; segmentation; representation learning; and supervised, semi-supervised, unsupervised, and transformer-based models, with emphasis on multimodal fusion with HPV testing, spectroscopy, and MRI. Across retrospective datasets and growing real-world deployments, AI systems can achieve high accuracy and sensitivity, accelerate workflows, reduce costs, and expand coverage via portable and edge-computing devices. However, translation is constrained by data bias, variable image quality, opaque decision-making, and fragmented regulation. We outline requirements for clinically robust and equitable deployment, including diverse multi-center datasets, federated and privacy-preserving learning, explainable interfaces, standardized validation with histopathologic endpoints, and clinician-in-the-loop workflows. Finally, we highlight future directions such as hybrid explainable AI with large language models, multi-omics integration, and adaptive models resilient to data drift.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.