131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11577136)
1. The use of a standard proforma in breast cancer reporting.
Mathers ME; Shrimankar J; Scott DJ; Charlton FG; Griffith CD; Angus B
J Clin Pathol; 2001 Oct; 54(10):809-11. PubMed ID: 11577136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A survey of reporting of colorectal cancer in Scotland: compliance with guidelines and effect of proforma reporting.
Woods YL; Mukhtar S; McClements P; Lang J; Steele RJ; Carey FA
J Clin Pathol; 2014 Jun; 67(6):499-505. PubMed ID: 24567415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evidence of effectiveness of clinical audit in improving histopathology reporting standards of mastectomy specimens.
Appleton MA; Douglas-Jones AG; Morgan JM
J Clin Pathol; 1998 Jan; 51(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 9577368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Histopathology reporting in colorectal cancer: a proforma improves quality.
Siriwardana PN; Pathmeswaran A; Hewavisenthi J; Deen KI
Colorectal Dis; 2009 Oct; 11(8):849-53. PubMed ID: 19740157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The use of a proforma improves colorectal cancer pathology reporting.
Rigby K; Brown SR; Lakin G; Balsitis M; Hosie KB
Ann R Coll Surg Engl; 1999 Nov; 81(6):401-3. PubMed ID: 10655894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Upper gastrointestinal cancer pathology reporting: a regional audit to compare standards with minimum datasets.
King PM; Blazeby JM; Gupta J; Alderson D; Moorghen M
J Clin Pathol; 2004 Jul; 57(7):702-5. PubMed ID: 15220361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Can the completeness of radiological cancer staging reports be improved using proforma reporting? A prospective multicentre non-blinded interventional study across 21 centres in the UK.
Patel A; Rockall A; Guthrie A; Gleeson F; Worthy S; Grubnic S; Burling D; Allen C; Padhani A; Carey B; Cavanagh P; Peake MD; Brown G
BMJ Open; 2018 Oct; 8(10):e018499. PubMed ID: 30282676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Improving the quality of operative notes for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Assessing the impact of a standardized operation note proforma.
Thomson DR; Baldwin MJ; Bellini MI; Silva MA
Int J Surg; 2016 Mar; 27():17-20. PubMed ID: 26804350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. An audit of breast cancer pathology reporting in Australia in 1995.
Kricker A; Armstrong B; Smith C; Bilous M; Camaris C; Mayer A; Psarianos T
Br J Cancer; 1999 May; 80(3-4):563-8. PubMed ID: 10408867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Colorectal cancer pathology reporting: a regional audit.
Bull AD; Biffin AH; Mella J; Radcliffe AG; Stamatakis JD; Steele RJ; Williams GT
J Clin Pathol; 1997 Feb; 50(2):138-42. PubMed ID: 9155695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Histopathology reporting of breast cancer in Queensland: the impact on the quality of reporting as a result of the introduction of recommendations.
Austin R; Thompson B; Coory M; Walpole E; Francis G; Fritschi L
Pathology; 2009; 41(4):361-5. PubMed ID: 19404849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Improvement in quality of colorectal cancer pathology reporting with a standardized proforma--a comparative study.
Beattie GC; McAdam TK; Elliott S; Sloan JM; Irwin ST
Colorectal Dis; 2003 Nov; 5(6):558-62. PubMed ID: 14617240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Histopathology of breast carcinoma--an audit of 50 reports in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
Mamoon N; Hassan U; Mushtaq S; Sharif MA
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2010; 11(1):169-72. PubMed ID: 20593952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Completeness of low anterior resection pathology report: a hospital-based audit with recommendations on improving reporting.
Nambiar A; Vivek N; Bindu MR; Sudheer OV; Bai L
Indian J Cancer; 2010; 47(2):156-9. PubMed ID: 20448379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Mammographically directed breast biopsies: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of clinical physician expectations and of specimen handling and reporting characteristics in 434 institutions.
Nakhleh RE; Jones B; Zarbo RJ
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1997 Jan; 121(1):11-8. PubMed ID: 9111087
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. An audit comparing the reporting of staging MRI scans for rectal cancer with the London Cancer Alliance (LCA) guidelines.
Siddiqui MRS; Shanmuganandan AP; Rasheed S; Tekkis P; Brown G; Abulafi AM
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2017 Nov; 43(11):2093-2104. PubMed ID: 28947340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Oesophageal and gastric cancer pathology reporting: a regional audit.
Burroughs SH; Biffin AH; Pye JK; Williams GT
J Clin Pathol; 1999 Jun; 52(6):435-9. PubMed ID: 10562811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The effects of implementing synoptic pathology reporting in cancer diagnosis: a systematic review.
Sluijter CE; van Lonkhuijzen LR; van Slooten HJ; Nagtegaal ID; Overbeek LI
Virchows Arch; 2016 Jun; 468(6):639-49. PubMed ID: 27097810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The use of a standard proforma in breast cancer reporting.
Wilson E; Feakins R
J Clin Pathol; 2002 Sep; 55(9):719. PubMed ID: 12195010
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Pathology reporting of breast cancer: trends in 1989-1999, following the introduction of mammographic screening in Western Australia.
Harvey JM; Sterrett GF; McEvoy S; Fritschi L; Jamrozik K; Ingram D; Joseph D; Dewar J; Byrne MJ;
Pathology; 2005 Oct; 37(5):341-6. PubMed ID: 16194843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
