Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
The Cole equation parameters of the curves shown in Fig 1_
| Women who did not develop CIN2+ | Ro = 1485 | R∞ = 80 | Fc = 4500 | α = 0.18 |
| Women who did develop CIN2+ | Ro = 1220 | R∞ = 90 | Fc = 5100 | α = 0.24 |
This shows how the 847 women were grouped for analysis_ The prevalence of CIN2+, and the annual risk of disease, is also given for each group_ The annual risk takes into account the fact that the first three groups of women did not have the same median period from the time of the index colposcopy to the time when disease was detected_
| Outcome of colposcopy (CI) and EIS | Prevalence of CIN2+ within 3 years | Percentage risk of developing CIN2+ per annum, over the follow-up period for each woman | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Both CI and EIS negative | CIN2+ arose in 13 (3.28%) | 1.20% |
| Group 2 | CI negative but EIS positive | CIN2+ arose in 12 (3.77%) | 1.64% |
| Group 3 | Both CI and EIS positive | CIN2+ arose in 10 (8.13%) | 4.57% |
| Group 4 | CI positive but EIS negative | No cases of CIN2+ | N/A |
The breakdown of the prevalence of disease in women where the index CI was negative and at least one EIS point was above the higher probability index threshold of 0_87_
| Number of abnormal EIS points | Number of women | Cases of CIN2+ within three years | Prevalence of disease |
|---|---|---|---|
| One | 226 | 7 | 3.1% |
| Two | 111 | 5 | 4.50% |
| Three or more | 104 | 10 | 9.62% |
| One or two | 337 | 12 | 3.56% |