Impact of technology on cytology outcome in cervical cancer screening of young and older women.

Little is known about age-dependent variation in outcomes of cervical cytology with modern technologies. This population-based study evaluated age-dependent changes after routine implementation of ThinPrep and SurePath technology in two independent laboratories, and controlled for time trends in a third laboratory using manually read conventional cytology continually. Data were collected from the Danish National Health Care Registers. For each laboratory, we compared proportions of abnormal cytology defined as atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance or worse (ASCUS+) by age and technology phase. The study included 489,960 cytological samples with no recent abnormality from women aged 23-59 years, routinely screened between 1998 and 2007. Implementation of SurePath liquid-based cytology (LBC) was followed by an increase in abnormal cytology in women aged 23-29 years from 4.6 to 6.1%, relative proportion (RP): 1.31 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08-1.61], and a decrease in women aged 45-59 years from 2.9 to 2.0%, RP: 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60-0.83). Implementation of ThinPrep LBC was followed by a decrease in abnormal cytology both in women aged 23-29 years from 7.7 to 6.8%, RP: 0.89 (95% CI: 0.78-1.02) and in women aged 45-59 years from 3.4 to 1.0%, RP: 0.30 (95% CI: 0.24-0.37). With implementation of imaging-assisted reading, regardless of the brand of technology, the proportion of abnormality increased by around 30% in all age groups (range from 19 to 41%). In the laboratory with unchanged technology no trends in abnormality proportions were observed. The impact of LBC implementation on cytological abnormality proportions varied considerably across age groups.

The astrobiology primer: an outline of general knowledge--version 1, 2006.

The Astrobiology Primer has been created as a reference tool for those who are interested in the interdisciplinary field of astrobiology. The field incorporates many diverse research endeavors, but it is our hope that this slim volume will present the reader with all he or she needs to know to become involved and to understand, at least at a fundamental level, the state of the art. Each section includes a brief overview of a topic and a short list of readable and important literature for those interested in deeper knowledge. Because of the great diversity of material, each section was written by a different author with a different expertise. Contributors, authors, and editors are listed at the beginning, along with a list of those chapters and sections for which they were responsible. We are deeply indebted to the NASA Astrobiology Institute (NAI), in particular to Estelle Dodson, David Morrison, Ed Goolish, Krisstina Wilmoth, and Rose Grymes for their continued enthusiasm and support. The Primer came about in large part because of NAI support for graduate student research, collaboration, and inclusion as well as direct funding. We have entitled the Primer version 1 in hope that it will be only the first in a series, whose future volumes will be produced every 3-5 years. This way we can insure that the Primer keeps up with the current state of research. We hope that it will be a great resource for anyone trying to stay abreast of an ever-changing field.

The ESEM used to image crystalline structures of polymers and to image ink on paper.

This article describes two cases in which the advantages of the ESEM have been exploited in unanticipated ways. First, we have found that etching occurs as the electron beam scans the surface of uncoated polymers in the ESEM. The surface topography caused by this etching, as seen in ESEM images, reflects the morphology of crystalline structures in the polymers. This technique has been valuable in the study of such textures in polymers. The second application is related to our use of the ESEM in support of research on the deinking of paper. In this effort we have learned that an unconventional contrast mechanism can be used during ESEM imaging to distinguish between inked and non-inked areas of newsprint. Under usual operating conditions, ESEM imaging does not distinguish between inked and non-inked areas. However, at relatively low sample chamber pressures the non-inked areas appear brighter than inked areas in ESEM images.