Table 2. Quality of slides that had been read in study hospitals according to re-examination by expert slide readers.
Hospital no. | Good | Poor | Unreadable |
1 | 4 (18.2) | 13 (59.1) | 5 (22.7) |
2 | 2 (10.0) | 14 (70.0) | 4 (20.0) |
3 | 2 (10.5) | 7 (36.8) | 10 (52.6) |
4 | 2 (11.7) | 15 (88.2) | 0 |
5 | 2 (10.0) | 14 (70.0) | 4 (20.0) |
6 | 13 (86.7) | 0 | 2 (13.3) |
7 | 6 (30.0) | 12 (60.0) | 2 (10.0) |
8 | 5 (62.5) | 3 (37.5) | 0 |
9 | 1 (16.7) | 4 (66.7) | 1 (16.7) |
10 | 2 (10.0) | 13 (65.0) | 5 (25.0) |
11 | 13 (65.0) | 7 (35.0) | 0 |
12 | 17 (89.5) | 2 (10.5) | 0 |
Total | 69 (33.5) | 104 (50.5) | 33 (16.0) |