{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024709302325581394, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011627906976744186, 'mean_word_length': 4.991304347826087, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?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}}
Does flexible cystoscopy miss more tumours than rod-lens examination?

The first blind, prospective, randomised comparison of flexible cystoscopy with rod-lens cystoscopy was carried out on 53 consecutive volunteers with bladder tumours or haematuria. Three patients' recurrences were missed on flexible cystoscopy and 3 others on rod-lens examination. It was expected that the 9% rate of missed tumours would lessen with increased experience of flexible cystoscopy, as 2 of them occurred in the first 12 examinations and all of the lesions missed were < 5 mm in diameter. Rod-lens cystoscopy, the accuracy of which appears to have been measured for the first time, was no more sensitive.