84 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1541952)
1. The adequate cervical smear: a modern dilemma.
Campion MJ
J Fam Pract; 1992 Mar; 34(3):273-5. PubMed ID: 1541952
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. [Cervical smears taken by physicians' assistants are of lesser quality than smears taken by family physicians, but almost as good as the national average].
van Rijswijk A
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Feb; 144(8):399. PubMed ID: 10703599
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Development of a Pap smear quality-assurance system in family practice.
Curtis P; Varenholt JJ; Skinner B; Addison L; Resnick J; Kebede M
Fam Med; 1993 Feb; 25(2):135-9. PubMed ID: 8458544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The cervical smear. The cytopathologist's point of view.
Drake M
Aust Fam Physician; 1990 May; 19(5):695-7. PubMed ID: 2346422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [The impending loss of screening for cervix uteri carcinoma in the Netherlands].
Lammes FB
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1986 Apr; 130(15):673-4. PubMed ID: 3703044
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Technology and process and cervical cancer prevention.
Raab SS; Grzybicki DM
Am J Clin Pathol; 2008 Feb; 129(2):187-9. PubMed ID: 18208797
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Setting up a GP smear recall scheme.
Porter K
Nurs Times; 1989 Jan 4-10; 85(1):35. PubMed ID: 2922311
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Smear campaign.
Eardley A; Elkind A
Health Serv J; 1992 Aug; 102(5316):28-9. PubMed ID: 10121394
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. [A comment to Docent Pekka Nieminen].
Vuopala S
Duodecim; 1999; 115(21):2410. PubMed ID: 11973875
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. [Cervical smears unsuitable for exclusion of cervical carcinoma].
Giard RW; Blok P
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jan; 144(2):86-7. PubMed ID: 10674109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Pap smear screening.
Pederson C
J Fam Pract; 1988 May; 26(5):592. PubMed ID: 3367121
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Quality assurance in cervical cytopathology.
Light AM
Cytopathology; 1997 Aug; 8(4):290-2. PubMed ID: 9252748
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Reliability of Pap smear reports.
Ruffin MT
Fam Pract Res J; 1991 Jun; 11(2):133-8. PubMed ID: 2058406
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. [Cervical smears taken by physicians' assistants are of lesser quality than smears taken by family physicians, but almost as good as the national average].
Voordijk-van der Ben MH; Buntinx F
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jan; 144(2):74-7. PubMed ID: 10674106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Have the most recent Pap smear guidelines affected GP practices?
Wai D; Ferrier A; Collings S; Laverty C
Aust Fam Physician; 1996 Jan; Suppl 1():S44-8. PubMed ID: 9479800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Maryland--Greece--Finland?].
Mäkinen J
Duodecim; 1999; 115(22):2506-7. PubMed ID: 11973975
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [Management of an abnormal cervical smear. National Accreditation and Health Evaluation Agency].
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 1999 Jul; 28(4):310-8. PubMed ID: 10480061
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical inquiries. Is the ThinPrep better than conventional Pap smear at detecting cervical cancer?
Andy C; Turner LF; Neher JO
J Fam Pract; 2004 Apr; 53(4):313-5. PubMed ID: 15068777
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Cervical cytology.
Beal MW
NAACOGS Clin Issu Perinat Womens Health Nurs; 1990; 1(4):470-8. PubMed ID: 2081083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Benefits of the conventional Papanicolaou smear.
Mali BN; Hazari KT; Joshi JV
Acta Cytol; 2004; 48(3):466-7. PubMed ID: 15192976
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
