Talk:Pap test

message: We should have a separate Wikipedia page for this particular Pap result.  I was doing a search to find out the recommended management of this lesion, but ASCUS brought up a fungus.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattbeckwith (talk • contribs) 00:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not much point in having a separate page about it until there is enough material to warrant a split.  (Reduces duplication, makes it easier to read and easier to maintain to keep test results here until this page gets too big.) Zodon (talk) 04:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ASCUS 

message: seems to have a lot of jargon that may not be strictly necessary to convey the most salient info.  Also, the jargon is all at the beginning.  I'm worried that a lot of readers will get derailed by the hard technical stuff and may not make it to the interesting/important bits toward the end (how often to get tested, origin of the term "Pap" etc).  Any objections to a radical de-jargonectomy?  Or at least to moving the jargon down out of the Intro section?   Retroid 15:48, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jargon 

message: I've changed the part which was about the Pap test being a screening tool for ectocervical, endocervical and endometrial malignancies. This is because the sampling devices and the test itself were never designed to sample the latter two areas. There is this an issue of the cells being consistently and reliably there. Endocervical cells are more likely to be present, as part of the sampling device enters the endocervical canal and scrapes off cells - however, not all the the endocervical tissue can be sampled due to the anatomy.
The endometrium would rarely be directly sampled using a device designed for taking a Pap test. In certain circumstances, such as post-treatment, particularly, post-trachelectomy, the lower uterine segment may be directly sampled and these can cause diagnostic problems. Cells from the endometrium do exfoliate (cf menstruation) and so may be present on the cervix at the time when a Pap test is taken. Again, over time, abnormalities have come to be recognised in these cells - so screening staff are trained to recognise them - in case they are there. I have myself identified them and patients have been diagnised with endometrial cancer, however, this would be better described described a fortutituous than by design.
Similarly, cells have been seen in Pap tests from for example, ovarian adenoarcinoma (due to exfoliation and occasionally metastasis).
I changed it because I thought to state that it is a tool for these two anatomical sites was misleading. C Geary 22:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of changes re: Pap test as a screening tool 

message: I added a "technical" template to this page because it is difficult to understand exactly what is being said, it needs to be simplified in some sections for general readers. Please remove the template after corrections have been made to the article. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 17:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Template added

message: "BMJ 1997;315:953-954 (11 October) Letters (snip) "It may be that deaths from cervical cancer in women born since 1930 are being halved by screening. If so, then the number of deaths in 1995 would have been 2000 in the absence of screening instead of 1339 (which would represent a doubling of the observed 661 deaths in women born since 1930). This saving of hundreds of lives comes at a high cost. Department of Health statistics show that in England and Wales each year about 800 000 women have abnormal smears; 166 000 of these abnormalities are severe enough to warrant referral for investigation and treatment. A tiny minority of these women are actually helped.
The NHS cervical screening programme is among the best in the world, and 30 years' experience has shown much about the inherent complexities and limitations of early detection as an approach to preventing cancer. It is easy to make simplistic claims about screening. In the long term we will do more for the public by being honest.
A E Raffle, Consultant in public health medicine "
- one of a large range of estimates, but one of the more defensible. Richard Keatinge 17:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Effectiveness

message: *Oppose merge.  As an entity, the pap smear is a subset of the pelvic examination.  The pap smear article is long enough to stand on its own. What needs to happen is-- the pelvic exam article needs to be expanded.  I propose the Practical aspects section be moved and a main article link is created in the pelvic exam article. Nephron  T|C 17:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of ''pap smear'' and ''pelvic examination'' 

message: Good god people, shouldn't SOME recognition be made of how freakin' INVASIVE and uncomfortable this examination is for the patient!?? How about a mention of maybe some medical research into a HPV detection method that does NOT require such invasive practices??? SOMETHING!! --Promus Kaa 05:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find a well-referenced piece about this sort of thing in a reliable source, then I would say by all means put it in. Not simply personal-experience type pages, though. 86.132.138.84 18:06, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a pap smear is a small price to pay and quite effective if you compare death due to cervical cancer in the developed and developing world ().  There has been a fair deal of work on improving the experience-- e.g. BMJ. 2006 Jul 22;333(7560):171. Epub 2006 Jun 27. Free Full Text.  There is also a study on self-collected samples --  (The acceptability of self-collected samples for HPV testing vs. the pap test as alternatives in cervical cancer screening).  Here is a list (PubMed) of a few more studies.  Here is another list. Nephron  T|C 18:54, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I would agree that something should be included about patient discomfort and also if that acts as a deterrent to screening.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.198.97.208 (talk) 07:47, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not to be flippant, the number one risk factor for death from cervical cancer is inadequate cervical cancer screening. In fact, the majority of women who die from cervical cancer have never had a pap smear. D.c.camero (talk) 00:06, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Privacy!! 

message: Aurel Babes, a romanian scientist, was the first to publish a paper on cervical cancer screening test by cervical cytology, allthough Papanicolaou is generally credited for this discovery.
There is an article on Wikipedia about Babes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurel_Babe%C5%9F  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.231.120.239 (talk) 17:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aurel Babes 

message: I moved the article to pap test from pap smear.  This is logical if one considers the fact that many labs now use liquid-based cytology, i.e. the cells scrapped from the cervix are:
* put into a liquid and then, via automation, put onto a microscope slide --as opposed to
* smeared onto a microscope slide directly and then fixed.
See:  for comparison/reasoning why this is becoming the new standard - Cancer. 2007 Oct 25;111(5):285-91.) and  Nephron  T|C 19:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to 'pap test' (from pap smear) 

message: This statement is very misleading.  "It is generally recommended that sexually active females seek Pap smear testing annually, although guidelines may vary from country to country."
There is significant evidence that screening every 3-5 years is still effective, is more cost effective, and poses less risk from false positives.  Further, many guidelines recommend less frequent screening. So to say that annual screening is the norm is misleading.
If this statement is to be left, it clearly needs a citation to a reputable source that asserts that annual pap smears are generally recommended.  As well as notation that the mater is debated.
I think a better fix would be to point out the variety of guidelines, (e.g.
"It is generally recommended that females who have had sex seek regular Pap smear testing.
Guidelines on frequency vary, from annually to every five years."
Either way, an explanation of the trade-offs on frequency is also in order.
[Cost, risk of false positive, long time for transit from infection to cancer]
I will gather a few citations for this.
Zodon (talk) 08:06, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: However you seem to have only looked at US sources.  If you look at other developed nations (EU, former members of British commonwealth, etc., you will see that 3-5 is more typical.  Therefore 3-5 includes US (USPSTF, ACOG, and ACS says 3 is okay for many women) as well as many other nations.  Zodon (talk) 04:57, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Annual screening is not "generally recommended" 

message: In Technical aspects section there's the following story:
I have added  mark. But the bigger question remains. Did it really happen? I tried searching for it on Google, but the only Karen Smith that is somewhat related to Pap test or cervical cancer is a currently living doctor gynaecologist...
Should we just delete this story from the article?
--Alsh 14:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Karen Smith 

message: The recent edit stating that cervical CA was a leading cause of death of women before the Pap test seems questionable/possible overstatement.
From the cervical cancer article: "Worldwide, cervical cancer is the fifth most deadly cancer in women." (World Health Organization (February 2006). "Fact sheet No. 297: Cancer". Retrieved on 2007-12-01.)
While this includes many places that have Pap smear screening programs, it still includes many that don't.  Given the improvements in sanitation, maternal health care and prevention of communicable diseases (which have significantly reduced other causes of death in women) it seems unlikely that cervical CA was a leading cause of death.  (Perhaps some qualifier was dropped, e.g. cancer death?).
The statement that "Since the introduction of the Pap test, deaths caused by carcinoma of the cervix have been reduced by up to 99% in some populations where women are screened regularly."  Also seems problematic.  Not that it isn't true, but perhaps it overplays the effectiveness of Pap screening.  Adding some perspective might help (e.g. typical improvement attributed to Pap screening, or range, what populations showed most improvement, etc.)  Not saying that Pap smear isn't highly effective, but 99% seems higher than the statistics I remember seeing.  (Have to go check my notes.) Zodon (talk) 10:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effectiveness and leading cause of death 

message: Would a Pap Smear be affected if a woman just gave birth? Would a Post-Partum Pap Smear be confused from a woman's sudden change of body chemistry due to birth? Or hormones?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.104.237.178 (talk) 20:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It could be affected.  Repair/changes in the cervical cells more likely to cause problems than body chemistry, etc.  Pap smear should be at least 8 weeks Post-partum.  (Think reference for this is Koss page 368, but have to check that)  Zodon (talk) 22:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post Partum Pap Smear 

message: I totally disagree that Babes was the first to describe the vaginal smear test as we know it from Papanicolaou. If you compare the two techniques, one can see that they are totally different in their design and concept.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.134.113.33 (talk • contribs) 
:I have removed your edit partly because of non-encyclopedic language, and partly because it doesn't have a citation.  Please provide a citation to a WP:MEDRS and then we can work it in to the article.  Thanks.  Zodon (talk) 21:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babes or Pap test 

message: http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=WHO&f=inID%3aHSC15
Will maybe generate a map.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: World perspective on the PAP from the WHO

message: can trichomonas be found in a pap test  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.75.177.74 (talk) 18:33, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes it can.  In fact, pap smears are good for a lot of things, like herpes and yeast infection.  As the page is written now, it makes it look like pap smears are used almost exclusively to diagnose HPV or cervical cancer, which isn't true.  The EMedicine pages have some good stuff if anyone has spare time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pathogenesis (talk • contribs) 02:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Saying it is good for them is a bit of an overstatement.  It can find various other conditions, but in many cases it isn't as good at detecting them as other tests.  Zodon (talk) 05:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  can trichomonas be found in a pap test 

message: There is a lot on the Internet about women finding smear tests very painful
It is totally unnecessary for there to be any pain or discomfort at all.
Women need to ask the nurse to use what is called a "virginal spectrum"
which is half the size of the normal spectrum but still large enough for the 
nurse to see your cervix.
They can also put some numbing cream in your vagina beforehand.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.161.16.236 (talk • contribs) 
: There is no such thing as a "virginal speculum" (or 'virginal spectrum' for that matter) There are different sizes and shapes of specula which can be chosen depending on anatomical differences, but there is not one designated specifically for women who have never had intercourse. Pain and discomfort are to different things. A pelvic examination will often be uncomfortable, but should not be frankly painful. If the exam is painful, then it could indicate that the person has a pathology that needs evaluation. "Numbing cream" should not be needed for an examination. Part of the examination is determining if there are areas that are painful. It is important to note that to allow them to be evaluated, and any numbing of the area would hinder this.  If you experience pain or discomfort, discuss this with your healthcare provider. D.c.camero (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  painful smear tests  

message: Cyberfreeworld (talk) 18:51, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical Implementation 

message: The Papanicolaou test is a method of cervical screening used to detect potentially precancerous and cancerous processes ... The test was independently invented in the 1920s by Dr. Georgios Papanikolaou and Dr. Aurel Babeș and named after Papanikolaou.
Named after: You had one job. Care to explain yourself, or mum's the word? 
A possible solution is to create a redirect from Georgios Papanicolaou (no such page as of today) to Georgios Papanikolaou and then standardize on the 'c' spelling within this article. — MaxEnt 21:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: On a moment's further thought, if I were moved to rectify this small inconsistency, I'd probably link "Georgios Papanicolaou" in the first instance (either through the proposed redirect, or by textual override to the existing link title) and then gloss this first instance with "(also spelled Papanikolaou)". And then standardize on the 'c' spelling for the rest of the voyage. — MaxEnt 21:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mum's the word?  

message: The addition of sensitivity and specificity of pap smears was well written and easy to understand. I thought the gender-affirming care section was written with an objective lens and contained several clinical pearls! I appreciated the elaboration of the light microscopy technique but the following sentence doesn't add much to the section: "Screening with light microscopy is first done on low (10x) power and then switched to higher (40x) power upon viewing suspicious findings." Great job! Zetinoy (talk) 07:06, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022

message: The article covers a broad range of topics falling under the umbrella of Pap smear. The photos of smear samples with descriptions below are helpful. The addition of gender-affirming care section is inclusive of people who may not identify as cis-gender women. The incorporation of statistics to corroborate effectiveness bolsters the informative nature of the article. The procedure section seem a bit jargon-heavy, so maybe reducing the amount of technical terms (or at least following up the use of technical terms with a brief explanation in few words) may be helpful. Lastly, it is uncertain how much value/benefit the "Experimental Techniques" section adds to the article, but overall a great update and revision of the previous article.  Yslee22 (talk) 17:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: The introduction to the page offers great insights and an overview of the subject matter without being too overbearing to the reader. Your team did a great job of balancing just how much information to provide in the introduction to keep readers fully informed. In doing so, it also creates a nice segue into the more detail-heavy sections later in the article. All the major details are also substantiated by articles, and so the References sections is very extensive, offering lots of outside sources for readers to reference.  Ymesfin (talk) 01:26, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki Education assignment: UCSF SOM Inquiry In Action-- Wikipedia Editing 2022