94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11253141)
1. What constitutes a histological confirmation of cancer? A survey of terminology interpretation in two English regions.
Silcocks P; Page M
J Clin Pathol; 2001 Mar; 54(3):246-8. PubMed ID: 11253141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Modifying phrases in surgical pathology reports: introduction of Standardized Scheme of Reporting Certainty in Pathology Reports (SSRC-Path).
Amin A; DeLellis RA; Fava JL
Virchows Arch; 2021 Nov; 479(5):1021-1029. PubMed ID: 34272982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Phraseology in pathology reports. A comparative study of interpretation among pathologists and surgeons.
Attanoos RL; Bull AD; Douglas-Jones AG; Fligelstone LJ; Semararo D
J Clin Pathol; 1996 Jan; 49(1):79-81. PubMed ID: 8666692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Interpretive Differences Between Patients and Radiologists Regarding the Diagnostic Confidence Associated With Commonly Used Phrases in the Radiology Report.
Mityul MI; Gilcrease-Garcia B; Searleman A; Demertzis JL; Gunn AJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Jan; 210(1):123-126. PubMed ID: 29023151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Use of modifying phrases in surgical pathology reports: is there a different understanding between pathologists and treating physicians?
Prieto VG; Vollmer RT; Shea CR
Virchows Arch; 2022 Nov; 481(5):759-766. PubMed ID: 36098817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Colorectal cancer registration: the central importance of pathology.
Manser MD; Levine DF; Pheby DF; Pitcher RW
J Clin Pathol; 2000 Nov; 53(11):875-7. PubMed ID: 11127275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Use and interpretation of phrases in histopathology reports.
De Hewavisenthi SS; Fernando P
Ceylon Med J; 2005 Mar; 50(1):37-8. PubMed ID: 15881567
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Advancing synoptic cancer reports beyond English: the University of Bern/PathoLink approach.
Banz Y; Berezowska S; de Leval L; Rubbia-Brandt L; Tolnay M; Moch H; Perren A; Hewer E
Virchows Arch; 2018 Nov; 473(5):655-656. PubMed ID: 30088082
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Use of oral pathology services by general histopathologists and their attitudes to training of oral pathologists.
Barret AW; Speight PM
J Clin Pathol; 1996 Jul; 49(7):565-9. PubMed ID: 8813955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Medical nomenclature and common conventions for trauma registries.
Forrey AW; Pilcher S; Pence S; Williams M; Dayton B; Herman CM
J Med Syst; 1987 Jun; 11(2-3):191-203. PubMed ID: 3668406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Is a Revision a Revision? An Analysis of National Arthroplasty Registries' Definitions of Revision.
Liebs TR; Splietker F; Hassenpflug J
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2015 Nov; 473(11):3421-30. PubMed ID: 25791442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A Population-Based Analysis of Application of WHO Nomenclature in Pathology Reports of Pulmonary Neuroendocrine Tumors.
Derks JL; van Suylen RJ; Thunnissen E; den Bakker MA; Smit EF; Groen HJ; Speel EJ; Dingemans AM
J Thorac Oncol; 2016 Apr; 11(4):593-602. PubMed ID: 26776865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Lay understanding of terms used in cancer consultations.
Chapman K; Abraham C; Jenkins V; Fallowfield L
Psychooncology; 2003 Sep; 12(6):557-66. PubMed ID: 12923796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Completeness of invasive cervical cancer at the Cancer Registry of Norway.
Bilet EF; Langseth H; Thoresen SØ; Bray F
Acta Oncol; 2009; 48(7):1070-3. PubMed ID: 19353339
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Electronic capture and communication of synoptic cancer data elements from pathology reports: results of the Reporting Pathology Protocols 2 (RPP2) project.
Hassell L; Aldinger W; Moody C; Winters S; Gerlach K; Schwenn M; Perriello D
J Registry Manag; 2009; 36(4):117-24; quiz 163-5. PubMed ID: 20795553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The interpretation of phrases used to describe uncertainty in pathology reports.
Galloway M; Taiyeb T
Patholog Res Int; 2011; 2011():656079. PubMed ID: 21876845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Unexpected expectations in critical values in anatomic pathology: improving agreement between pathologists and nonpathologists with the treatable immediately, life-threatening terminology.
Renshaw SA; Gould EW; Renshaw AA
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2011 Nov; 135(11):1391-3. PubMed ID: 22032563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Results of a questionnaire regarding criteria for adequacy of endometrial biopsies.
Phillips V; McCluggage WG
J Clin Pathol; 2005 Apr; 58(4):417-9. PubMed ID: 15790709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Nonstandardized Terminology to Describe Focal Liver Lesions in Patients at Risk for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Implications Regarding Clinical Communication.
Corwin MT; Lee AY; Fananapazir G; Loehfelm TW; Sarkar S; Sirlin CB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Jan; 210(1):85-90. PubMed ID: 29023148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Differing Interpretations of Report Terminology Between Primary Care Physicians and Radiologists.
Gunn AJ; Tuttle MC; Flores EJ; Mangano MD; Bennett SE; Sahani DV; Choy G; Boland GW
J Am Coll Radiol; 2016 Dec; 13(12 Pt A):1525-1529.e1. PubMed ID: 27595196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
