125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10212646)
21. Pap smear preceptor program.
Harris-Bray S
Aust Nurs Midwifery J; 2014 Apr; 21(9):42. PubMed ID: 24812782
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparative analysis of conventional Papanicolaou tests and a fluid-based thin-layer method.
Limaye A; Connor AJ; Huang X; Luff R
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2003 Feb; 127(2):200-4. PubMed ID: 12562235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Augmentation of Pap smear screening of high risk aboriginal women. Use of a computerised process tool within the Broome Aboriginal Medical Service.
Couzos S; Wronski I; Murray R; Cox H
Aust Fam Physician; 1998 Apr; 27(4):269-74. PubMed ID: 9581335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Age-specific patterns of unsatisfactory results for conventional Pap smears and liquid-based cytology: data from two randomised clinical trials.
Castle PE; Bulten J; Confortini M; Klinkhamer P; Pellegrini A; Siebers AG; Ronco G; Arbyn M
BJOG; 2010 Aug; 117(9):1067-73. PubMed ID: 20604775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Effects of transitioning from conventional methods to liquid-based methods on unsatisfactory Papanicolaou tests: results from a multicenter US study.
Owens CL; Peterson D; Kamineni A; Buist DS; Weinmann S; Ross TR; Williams AE; Stark A; Adams KF; Field TS
Cancer Cytopathol; 2013 Oct; 121(10):568-75. PubMed ID: 23658145
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. An Australian trial of ThinPrep: a new cytopreparatory technique.
Laverty CR; Thurloe JK; Redman NL; Farnsworth A
Cytopathology; 1995 Jun; 6(3):140-8. PubMed ID: 7669924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Effect of a mobile unit on changes in knowledge and use of cervical cancer screening among rural Thai women.
Swaddiwudhipong W; Chaovakiratipong C; Nguntra P; Mahasakpan P; Lerdlukanavonge P; Koonchote S
Int J Epidemiol; 1995 Jun; 24(3):493-8. PubMed ID: 7672887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Not all unsatisfactory ThinPrep cervical Pap tests are unsatisfactory: Reprocessing improves the satisfactory and detection rates of ThinPrep cervical cytology.
AbdullGaffar B; Kamal MO
Diagn Cytopathol; 2010 Sep; 38(9):699-701. PubMed ID: 19950397
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. [Comparison of the ThinPrep monolayer technique and conventional cervical Pap smears in a high-risk population using the Munich II nomenclature].
Lellé RJ; Cordes A; Regidor M; Maier E; Flenker H
Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch; 2007; 47(2):81-7. PubMed ID: 17440269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Which are more correctly diagnosed: conventional Papanicolaou smears or Thinprep samples? A comparative study of 9 years of external quality-assurance testing.
Cummings MC; Marquart L; Pelecanos AM; Perkins G; Papadimos D; O'Rourke P; Ross JA
Cancer Cytopathol; 2015 Feb; 123(2):108-16. PubMed ID: 25487287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The cost of cervical cancer screening provided by a women's health nurse.
Furber SE; Donaldson C
Aust J Public Health; 1992 Sep; 16(3):226-31. PubMed ID: 1482713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Has the ThinPrep method of cervical screening maintained its improvement over conventional smears in terms of specimen adequacy?
Treacy A; Reynolds J; Kay EW; Leader M; Grace A
Diagn Cytopathol; 2009 Apr; 37(4):239-40. PubMed ID: 19217033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Liquid-based Papanicolaou smears without a transformation zone component: should clinicians worry?
Baer A; Kiviat NB; Kulasingam S; Mao C; Kuypers J; Koutsky LA
Obstet Gynecol; 2002 Jun; 99(6):1053-9. PubMed ID: 12052599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Very low human Papillomavirus DNA prevalence in mature women with negative computer-imaged liquid-based Pap tests.
Zhao C; Elishaev E; Yuan KH; Yu J; Austin RM
Cancer; 2007 Oct; 111(5):292-7. PubMed ID: 17879368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Causes and relevance of unsatisfactory and satisfactory but limited smears of liquid-based compared with conventional cervical cytology.
Siebers AG; Klinkhamer PJ; Vedder JE; Arbyn M; Bulten J
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2012 Jan; 136(1):76-83. PubMed ID: 22208490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. A community-based cervical screening program in a remote Aboriginal community in the Northern Territory.
Gilles MT; Crewe S; Granites IN; Coppola A
Aust J Public Health; 1995 Oct; 19(5):477-81. PubMed ID: 8713197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Conventional cervical cytologic smears vs. ThinPrep smears. A paired comparison study on cervical cytology.
Ferenczy A; Robitaille J; Franco E; Arseneau J; Richart RM; Wright TC
Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(6):1136-42. PubMed ID: 8960019
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Effects of gel lubricant on cervical cytology.
Charoenkwan K; Ninunanahaeminda K; Khunamornpong S; Srisomboon J; Thorner PS
Acta Cytol; 2008; 52(6):654-8. PubMed ID: 19068667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. PAPNET-assisted rescreening of cervical smears: cost and accuracy compared with a 100% manual rescreening strategy.
O'Leary TJ; Tellado M; Buckner SB; Ali IS; Stevens A; Ollayos CW
JAMA; 1998 Jan; 279(3):235-7. PubMed ID: 9438746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. ThinPrep detection of cervical and endometrial adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study.
Schorge JO; Hossein Saboorian M; Hynan L; Ashfaq R
Cancer; 2002 Dec; 96(6):338-43. PubMed ID: 12478681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
