{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020955574182732608, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002514668901927913, 'mean_word_length': 5.489130434782608, '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}}
Level of agreement and biopsy correlation using two‐ and three‐tier systems to grade cervical dyskaryosis

At present, a three‐tier system is used to grade cervical dyskaryosis in the UK, although the two‐tier Bethesda system is used in the United States, and the British Society for Clinical Cytology has recommended that a two‐tier system be implemented here. In this study, we have retrospectively re‐graded 117 conventional cervical smears using both systems to determine the intra‐ and interobserver variation and compare the cytology grading in both systems with the final histology. The intra and interobserver agreement was moderate using both grading systems, but the agreement between cytology grade and final histology was poor in both the two‐ and three‐tier systems, and slightly worse using two‐tier grading. However, when each of the three histological categories is considered separately the two‐tier system appears to work better. Therefore, changing the way in which cervical dyskaryosis is graded in the UK may result in poorer agreement between the cervical smear result and the final histological diagnosis if introduced without proper training, monitoring and assessment.