159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15282720)
1. 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]
2. Location-guided screening of liquid-based cervical cytology specimens: a potential improvement in accuracy and productivity is demonstrated in a preclinical feasibility trial.
Wilbur DC; Parker EM; Foti JA
Am J Clin Pathol; 2002 Sep; 118(3):399-407. PubMed ID: 12219782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A feasibility study of the AutoPap system location-guided screening.
Lee JS; Kuan L; Oh S; Patten FW; Wilbur DC
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):221-6. PubMed ID: 9479344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The AutoPap system for primary screening in cervical cytology. Comparing the results of a prospective, intended-use study with routine manual practice.
Wilbur DC; Prey MU; Miller WM; Pawlick GF; Colgan TJ
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):214-20. PubMed ID: 9479343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [The use of a computerised system in the reading of cytological cervicovaginals smears during programming of regional screening (one year of experience using the autopap system)].
Orlassino R; Fabbrini T; Gallo C; Vineis C
Pathologica; 2005 Apr; 97(2):78-83. PubMed ID: 16032952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Impact of the AutoPap (currently Focalpoint) primary screening system location guide use on interpretation time and diagnosis.
Ronco G; Vineis C; Montanari G; Orlassino R; Parisio F; Arnaud S; Berardengo E; Fabbrini T; Segnan N
Cancer; 2003 Apr; 99(2):83-8. PubMed ID: 12704687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Endometrial cells and the AutoPap System for primary screening of cervicovaginal Pap smears.
Walts AE; Thomas P
Diagn Cytopathol; 2002 Oct; 27(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 12357502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Sensitivity studies of AutoPap System Location-Guided Screening of cervical-vaginal cytologic smears.
Huang TW; Lin TS; Lee JS
Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(3):363-8. PubMed ID: 10349363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Automated prescreening of conventionally prepared cervical smears: a feasibility study.
Bartoo GT; Lee JS; Bartels PH; Kiviat NB; Nelson AC
Lab Invest; 1992 Jan; 66(1):116-22. PubMed ID: 1731146
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Results of AutoPap system-assisted and manual cytologic screening. A comparison.
Wertlake P
J Reprod Med; 1999 Jan; 44(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 9987733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A clinical trial of the AutoPap 300 QC system for quality control of cervicovaginal cytology in the clinical laboratory.
Colgan TJ; Patten SF; Lee JS
Acta Cytol; 1995; 39(6):1191-8. PubMed ID: 7483997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A feasibility study of the use of the AutoPap screening system as a primary screening and location-guided rescreening device.
Confortini M; Bonardi L; Bulgaresi P; Cariaggi MP; Cecchini S; Ciatto S; Cipparrone I; Galanti L; Maddau C; Matucci M; Rubeca T; Troni GM; Turco P; Zappa M; Carozzi F
Cancer; 2003 Jun; 99(3):129-34. PubMed ID: 12811852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Liquid-based cytology and conventional smears compared over two 12-month periods.
Williams AR
Cytopathology; 2006 Apr; 17(2):82-5. PubMed ID: 16548992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Increasing cytotechnologist workload above 100 slides per day using the ThinPrep imaging system leads to significant reductions in screening accuracy.
Elsheikh TM; Kirkpatrick JL; Cooper MK; Johnson ML; Hawkins AP; Renshaw AA
Cancer Cytopathol; 2010 Apr; 118(2):75-82. PubMed ID: 20151428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effectiveness of automated cervical cytology rescreening using the AutoPap 300 QC System.
Stevens MW; Milne AJ; James KA; Brancheau D; Ellison D; Kuan L
Diagn Cytopathol; 1997 Jun; 16(6):505-12. PubMed ID: 9181316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
