In article <[log in to unmask]>, Michael Durham
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>I would be fascinated to hear from anybody who can tell me why these
>screening catastrophes always seem to occur in cervical cancer
>screening.......and if there are any other areas of health which might be
>similarly prone to clinical errors/differences.
Having discussed this with a patient involved in screening the slides,
some of this may be down to the nature of the job which involves having
to look down a microscope at countless slides, one after another, all
very similar, making qualitative decisions, until they start dancing
before your eyes. The workload is heavy and enthusiasm is low.
If someone could devise a digito/optical recognition system, at least
every slide would be examined through the same criteria with ruthless
precision and undimmed enthusiasm.
Regards
George
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|