{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018272425249169437, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0033222591362126247, 'mean_word_length': 5.03, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Biological validity, cytodiagnosis, and therapy of cervix dysplasia].

Certain forms of dysplasia are biologically equal to carcinoma in situ and should be treated alike. The persistance of the state during the permanent cytologic control is to be regarded as criterion for the treatment of middle and even the slight dysplasia. Slides of cells indicating a dysplasia are therefore placed in a cytologic risk-group III D. If the restoration of the cytologic state cannot be observed within 12 months, the conisation as carcinoma prophylaxis of slight and middle forms of dysplasia should be performed.