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.
5. New Bethesda terminology and evidence-based management guidelines for cervical cytology findings. Stoler MH JAMA; 2002 Apr; 287(16):2140-1. PubMed ID: 11966390 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Inadequate cervical smear: what do we do? Phadnis SV; Doshi JS; Ogunnaike OO; Padwick ML; Sanusi FA Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2005 May; 84(5):486-8. PubMed ID: 15842215 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Can we improve the detection of glandular cervical lesions: the role and limitations of the Pap smear diagnosis atypical glandular cells (AGC). Duska LR Gynecol Oncol; 2009 Sep; 114(3):381-2. PubMed ID: 19647129 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Should we report cervical smears lacking endocervical component as unsatisfactory? Sidawy MK; Tabbara SO; Silverberg SG Diagn Cytopathol; 1992; 8(6):567-70. PubMed ID: 1468332 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Guideline for managing suspect and positive cytologic smears of the uterine cervix (revised form, version 2.4)]. Arbeitsgruppe "Guideline Zervixabstrich" Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch; 2005 Jan; 45(1):44-55. PubMed ID: 15655885 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Correlation of cervical cytodiagnosis and histopathology--an exercise in quality control. Kealy WF Ir J Med Sci; 1986 Nov; 155(11):381-8. PubMed ID: 3804671 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. [Quality of conventional PAP smears. Quality assessment and motivation for improvement]. Regitnig P; Nader A; Wiener H Pathologe; 2012 Jul; 33(4):293-300. PubMed ID: 22569927 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The economics of screening. Stewart CJ Cytopathology; 1997 Jun; 8(3):211. PubMed ID: 9202898 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Internal quality assurance in cervical cytology one laboratory's experience. Cross PA Cytopathology; 1996 Feb; 7(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 8833871 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cervical screening: what is the point? Robertson J; Woodend B Lancet; 1995 Jul; 346(8969):245; author reply 246-7. PubMed ID: 7616812 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [Evaluation of cytological screening for cancers and precancerous lesions of the cervix]. Boman F; Duhamel A; Trinh QD; Deken V; Leroy JL; Beuscart R Bull Cancer; 2003 Jul; 90(7):643-7. PubMed ID: 12957806 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting and criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology. Herbert A; Johnson J; Patnick J Cytopathology; 1995 Oct; 6(5):301-3. PubMed ID: 8785367 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Déjà vu in pap testing: return of the 5% false-negative fraction and the zero-error rate. Renshaw AA Diagn Cytopathol; 2002 Jun; 26(6):343-4. PubMed ID: 12112821 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of the sampling sequence on the quality of Papanicolaou smear. Rahnama P; Faghihzadeh S; Ziaei S Int J Gynecol Cancer; 2005; 15(1):66-9. PubMed ID: 15670299 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]