238 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12589640)
1. Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of pap smears.
Arbyn M; Schenck U; Ellison E; Hanselaar A
Cancer; 2003 Feb; 99(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 12589640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Rapid prescreening of Papanicolaou smears: a practical and efficient quality control strategy.
Djemli A; Khetani K; Auger M
Cancer; 2006 Feb; 108(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 16302251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Improvement in the routine screening of cervical smears: A study using rapid prescreening and 100% rapid review as internal quality control methods.
Tavares SB; Alves de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; Pinheiro de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
Cancer Cytopathol; 2011 Dec; 119(6):367-76. PubMed ID: 21954191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of the performance of rapid prescreening, 10% random review, and clinical risk criteria as methods of internal quality control in cervical cytopathology.
Tavares SB; Alves de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; Pinheiro de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
Cancer; 2008 Jun; 114(3):165-70. PubMed ID: 18454462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Detection of false negative Pap smears by rapid reviewing. A metaanalysis.
Arbyn M; Schenck U
Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(6):949-57. PubMed ID: 11127751
[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. Effectiveness of rapid prescreening and 10% rescreening in liquid-based Papanicolaou testing.
Currens HS; Nejkauf K; Wagner L; Raab SS
Am J Clin Pathol; 2012 Jan; 137(1):150-5. PubMed ID: 22180489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Low proportion of false-negative smears in the Finnish program for cervical cancer screening.
Lönnberg S; Anttila A; Kotaniemi-Talonen L; Kujari H; Melkko J; Granroth G; Vornanen M; Pietiläinen T; Sankila A; Arola J; Luostarinen T; Nieminen P
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2010 Feb; 19(2):381-7. PubMed ID: 20142239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Pap smears with glandular cell abnormalities: Are they detected by rapid prescreening?
Kanber Y; Charbonneau M; Auger M
Cancer Cytopathol; 2015 Dec; 123(12):739-44. PubMed ID: 26348845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of 100% rapid rescreening of negative cervical smears as a quality assurance measure.
Manrique EJ; Amaral RG; Souza NL; Tavares SB; Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC
Cytopathology; 2006 Jun; 17(3):116-20. PubMed ID: 16719853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The effect of the quality of Papanicolaou smears on the detection of cytologic abnormalities.
Mintzer M; Curtis P; Resnick JC; Morrell D
Cancer; 1999 Jun; 87(3):113-7. PubMed ID: 10385441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of HPV test versus conventional and automation-assisted Pap screening as potential screening tools for preventing cervical cancer.
Nieminen P; Vuorma S; Viikki M; Hakama M; Anttila A
BJOG; 2004 Aug; 111(8):842-8. PubMed ID: 15270934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. High-grade cervical abnormalities and screening intervals in New South Wales, Australia.
Schindeler S; Morrell S; Zuo Y; Baker D
J Med Screen; 2008; 15(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 18416954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Rapid prescreening as a quality assurance measure in cervical cytology.
Repse-Fokter A; Caks-Golec T
Acta Cytol; 2009; 53(3):268-70. PubMed ID: 19534265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. One hundred percent thorough quality control rescreening of liquid-based monolayers in cervicovaginal cytopathology.
Rowe LR; Marshall CJ; Bentz JS
Cancer; 2002 Dec; 96(6):325-9. PubMed ID: 12478679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Rapid prescreening is as effective at reducing screening error as postscreening with the FocalPoint automated screening device.
Wilgenbusch H; Mueller G; Neal M; Renshaw AA
Diagn Cytopathol; 2011 Nov; 39(11):818-21. PubMed ID: 20949451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Organisation of cervical cytology screening in Croatia: past, present and future.
Pajtler M; Audy-Jurković S; Kardum-Skelin I; Mahovlić V; Mozetic-Vrdoljak D; Ovanin-Rakić A
Coll Antropol; 2007 Apr; 31 Suppl 2():47-54. PubMed ID: 17598505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), Lugol's iodine (VILI), cervical cytology and HPV testing as cervical screening tools in Latin America. This report refers to partial results from the LAMS (Latin AMerican Screening) study.
Sarian LO; Derchain SF; Naud P; Roteli-Martins C; Longatto-Filho A; Tatti S; Branca M; Erzen M; Serpa-Hammes L; Matos J; Gontijo R; Bragança JF; Lima TP; Maeda MY; Lörincz A; Dores GB; Costa S; Syrjänen S; Syrjänen K
J Med Screen; 2005; 12(3):142-9. PubMed ID: 16156945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effectiveness of AutoPap system location-guided screening in the evaluation of cervical cytology smears.
Stevens MW; Milne AJ; Parkinson IH; Nespolon WW; Fazzalari NL; Arora N; Dodd TJ
Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Aug; 31(2):94-9. PubMed ID: 15282720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
