{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018867924528301886, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013062409288824383, 'mean_word_length': 5.330275229357798, '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}}
Liability issues with the Papanicolaou smear: an insurance industry perspective.

To better understand the sources of cervicovaginal cytology malpractice insurance losses, summaries of all new pathology claims for 25 consecutive months at one malpractice insurer were examined. In 56 claims (out of a total of 335), the interpretation of gynecologic smears was a central issue. The estimated dollar value of these claims was about 25% of the estimated value of all new pathology claims during that interval. Some common characteristics of these cases, as well as factors influencing their outcome, are discussed along with the special problems that cytology poses for malpractice insurers.