These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11247624)

  • 21. [Automation of cytological analysis of cervical smears].
    Cenci M; Giovagnoli MR; Olla SV; Drusco A; Vecchione A
    Minerva Ginecol; 1999; 51(7-8):291-8. PubMed ID: 10536424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Fluorescent studies directed towards the location of abnormal epithelial cells in cervical smears.
    Steven FS; Johnson J
    Cytopathology; 1990; 1(4):217-22. PubMed ID: 1714306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Economic impact of automated primary screening for cervical cancer.
    Lonky SA
    J Reprod Med; 2000 Jan; 45(1):83-4. PubMed ID: 10702051
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Automated screening of cervical cytology specimens.
    Birdsong GG
    Hum Pathol; 1996 May; 27(5):468-81. PubMed ID: 8621186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Use of automated primary screening on liquid-based, thin-layer preparations.
    Vassilakos P; Carrel S; Petignat P; Boulvain M; Campana A
    Acta Cytol; 2002; 46(2):291-5. PubMed ID: 11917575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Understanding the financial impact of covering new screening technologies. The case of automated Pap smears.
    McQuarrie HG; Ogden J; Costa M
    J Reprod Med; 2000 Nov; 45(11):898-906. PubMed ID: 11127101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. AutoPap 300 QC system scoring of cervical smears without "epithelial cell abnormalities".
    Colgan TJ; Bon N; Lee JS; Patten SF
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 9022725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Automation in cervical cancer screening. Part 1: fixed cell scanning systems.
    Husain OA; Tucker JH; Roberts BA
    Biomed Eng; 1976 May; 11(5):161-6. PubMed ID: 945084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Translational approaches to improving cervical screening.
    Baldwin P; Laskey R; Coleman N
    Nat Rev Cancer; 2003 Mar; 3(3):217-26. PubMed ID: 12612656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Automated screening of pap smears: a statement of caution.
    Medley G; Laverty CR; Fortune DW; Baird PJ; Smith LA; Papadimos DJ; Sterrett GF; Carter CD; Wright RG; Twin JE; Grace J; Bishop JM
    Med J Aust; 1996 Feb; 164(3):187. PubMed ID: 8628141
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Tumor marker studies of cervical smears. Potential for automation.
    Moncrieff D; Ormerod MG; Coleman DV
    Acta Cytol; 1984; 28(4):407-10. PubMed ID: 6205530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. FocalPoint slide classification algorithms show robust performance in classification of high-grade lesions on SurePath liquid-based cervical cytology slides.
    Parker EM; Foti JA; Wilbur DC
    Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Feb; 30(2):107-10. PubMed ID: 14755762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Our experience in using liquid based cytology in cervical screening (LBC)].
    Tsonev A; Ivanov S; Kovachev E; Kornovski Y; Ismail E
    Akush Ginekol (Sofiia); 2013; 52 Suppl 1():8-10. PubMed ID: 24294738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The FocalPoint System: FocalPoint slide profiler and FocalPoint GS.
    Kardos TF
    Cancer; 2004 Dec; 102(6):334-9. PubMed ID: 15549692
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Automated rescreening in cervical cytology. Mathematical models for evaluating overall process sensitivity, specificity and cost.
    Kaminsky FC; Benneyan JC; Mullins DL
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):209-23. PubMed ID: 9022745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Cost-effectiveness of 3 methods to enhance the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing.
    Brown AD; Garber AM
    JAMA; 1999 Jan; 281(4):347-53. PubMed ID: 9929088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Terminology, benchmarking and reporting in cervical cytology automation: the critical need for consistency.
    Krieger P; Naryshkin S
    Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(1):9-11. PubMed ID: 8604580
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Performance of the AutoPap primary screening system at Jefferson University Hospital.
    Bibbo M; Hawthorne C
    Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):27-9. PubMed ID: 9987446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The efficacy of an automated preparation device for cervical cytology.
    Hutchinson ML; Cassin CM; Ball HG
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1991 Sep; 96(3):300-5. PubMed ID: 1877527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Automated screening for cervical smears?
    Spriggs AI; Diamond RA; Meyer EW
    Lancet; 1968 Feb; 1(7538):359-60. PubMed ID: 4170181
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.