139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10560356)
1. The characteristics of false negative cervical smears--implications for the UK cervical cancer screening programme.
Baker RW; O'Sullivan JP; Hanley J; Coleman DV
J Clin Pathol; 1999 May; 52(5):358-62. PubMed ID: 10560356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Medicolegal affairs. International Academy of Cytology Task Force summary. Diagnostic Cytology Towards the 21st Century: An International Expert Conference and Tutorial.
Frable WJ; Austin RM; Greening SE; Collins RJ; Hillman RL; Kobler TP; Koss LG; Mitchell H; Perey R; Rosenthal DL; Sidoti MS; Somrak TM
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):76-119; discussion 120-32. PubMed ID: 9479326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The false-negative fraction: a statistical method to measure the efficacy of cervical smear screening laboratories.
Dolinar J; Ollayos CW; Tellado M; Ali I; Stevens A; Paquette C; Brodbelt S
Mil Med; 1999 Jun; 164(6):410-1. PubMed ID: 10377709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Partial rescreening of all negative smears: an improved method of quality assurance in laboratories undertaking cervical screening.
Faraker CA
Cytopathology; 1993; 4(1):47-50. PubMed ID: 8453016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Negative cytology preceding cervical cancer: causes and prevention.
Robertson JH; Woodend B
J Clin Pathol; 1993 Aug; 46(8):700-2. PubMed ID: 8408692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Review of cervical smears from 76 women with invasive cervical cancer: cytological findings and medicolegal implications.
Coleman DV; Poznansky JJ
Cytopathology; 2006 Jun; 17(3):127-36. PubMed ID: 16719855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Analysis of the intralaboratory diagnostic variability in the Imola cervical screening program].
Fabbris E; Bucchi L; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Ghidoni D; Medri M; Bondi A
Pathologica; 1998 Apr; 90(2):127-32. PubMed ID: 9619055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Potentially difficult smears of women with squamous cell carcinoma pose fewer problems when PAPNET is used for primary screening.
Kok MR; Schreiner-Kok PG; Van Der Veen G; Boon ME
Cytopathology; 1999 Oct; 10(5):324-34. PubMed ID: 10588351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Partial re-screening of all negative smears. A method of quality control of pathology department concerning smear screening against cervix cancer].
Jensen ML; Dybdahl H; Svanholm H
Ugeskr Laeger; 2000 May; 162(21):3024-7. PubMed ID: 10850190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Rapid review (partial rescreening) of cervical cytology. Four years experience and quality assurance implications.
Faraker CA; Boxer ME
J Clin Pathol; 1996 Jul; 49(7):587-91. PubMed ID: 8813961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A case-control study of true-positive versus false-negative cervical smears in women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) III.
O'Sullivan JP; A'Hern RP; Chapman PA; Jenkins L; Smith R; al-Nafussi A; Brett MT; Herbert A; McKean ME; Waddell CA
Cytopathology; 1998 Jun; 9(3):155-61. PubMed ID: 9638376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. An evaluation of 'rapid review' as a method of quality control of cervical smears using the AxioHOME microscope.
Baker RW; Wadsworth J; Brugal G; Coleman DV
Cytopathology; 1997 Apr; 8(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 9134333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Cervical cancer screening. False negative smears].
Vassilakos P; De Marval F; Muñoz M
Rev Med Suisse Romande; 1997 Aug; 117(8):597-601. PubMed ID: 9340714
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Review of negative and low-grade cervical smears in women with invasive cervical cancer after the first 3 years of the national cervical screening programme in Slovenia.
Repše-Fokter A; Pogačnik A; Snoj V; Primic-Žakelj M; Fležar MS
Cytopathology; 2012 Feb; 23(1):23-9. PubMed ID: 20964743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. False-Negative Rate of Papanicolaou Testing: A National Survey from the Thai Society of Cytology.
Koonmee S; Bychkov A; Shuangshoti S; Bhummichitra K; Himakhun W; Karalak A; Rangdaeng S
Acta Cytol; 2017; 61(6):434-440. PubMed ID: 28738387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control in a cervical screening programme.
Tavares SB; de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
Cytopathology; 2008 Aug; 19(4):254-9. PubMed ID: 18476988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Paired cervical smears: a method of reducing the false-negative rate in population screening.
Beilby JO; Bourne R; Guillebaud J; Steele ST
Obstet Gynecol; 1982 Jul; 60(1):46-8. PubMed ID: 7088450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Characteristics of high grade dyskaryotic cervical smears likely to be missed on rapid rescreening.
O'Sullivan JP; Chapman PA; Jenkins L; Smith R
Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(1):37-40. PubMed ID: 10667157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Differences between false-negative and true-positive Papanicolaou smears on Papnet-assisted review.
Mitchell H; Medley G
Diagn Cytopathol; 1998 Aug; 19(2):138-40. PubMed ID: 9702494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A more accurate measure of the false-negative rate of Papanicolaou smear screening is obtained by determining the false-negative rate of the rescreening process.
Renshaw AA; DiNisco SA; Minter LJ; Cibas ES
Cancer; 1997 Oct; 81(5):272-6. PubMed ID: 9349513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
