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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1615986)

  • 1. Cervical cytology: a randomized comparison of four sampling methods.
    McCord ML; Stovall TG; Meric JL; Summitt RL; Coleman SA
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Jun; 166(6 Pt 1):1772-7; discussion 1777-9. PubMed ID: 1615986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of the endocervical Cytobrush and Cervex-Brush in pregnant women.
    Paraiso MF; Brady K; Helmchen R; Roat TW
    Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Oct; 84(4):539-43. PubMed ID: 8090390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The Cytobrush effect on Pap smear adequacy.
    Davey-Sullivan B; Gearhart J; Evers CG; Cason Z; Replogle WH
    Fam Pract Res J; 1991 Mar; 11(1):57-64. PubMed ID: 2028815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A randomized trial of three methods of obtaining Papanicolaou smears.
    Pretorius RG; Sadeghi M; Fotheringham N; Semrad N; Watring WG
    Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Nov; 78(5 Pt 1):831-6. PubMed ID: 1923208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cervical smears following laser treatment. Comparison of Cervex brush versus Cytobrush-Ayre spatula sampling.
    Szarewski A; Cuzick J; Singer A
    Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):76-8. PubMed ID: 1994639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of cytobrush with Cervex-Brush for endocervical cytologic sampling.
    Neinstein LS; Church J; Akiyoshi T
    J Adolesc Health; 1992 Sep; 13(6):520-3. PubMed ID: 1390820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of the Cytobrush plus plastic spatula with the Cervex Brush for obtaining endocervical cells.
    Cannon JM; Blythe JG
    Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Oct; 82(4 Pt 1):569-72. PubMed ID: 8377984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Efficacy of the cytobrush versus the cotton swab in the collection of endocervical cells.
    Kristensen GB; Hølund B; Grinsted P
    Acta Cytol; 1989; 33(6):849-51. PubMed ID: 2588918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The efficiency of the cytobrush and cotton swab in obtaining endocervical cells in smears taken after conization of the cervix.
    Kristensen GB; Jensen LK; Ejersbo D; Hølund B
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 1989; 246(4):207-10. PubMed ID: 2619334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A randomized comparison of the 3 Papanicolaou smear collection methods.
    Kavak ZN; Eren F; Pekin S; Küllü S
    Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 1995 Nov; 35(4):446-9. PubMed ID: 8717577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of spatula and nonspatula methods for cervical sampling.
    Rammou-Kinia R; Anagnostopoulou I; Gomousa M
    Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):69-75. PubMed ID: 1994638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Cervex-Brush vs. spatula and Cytobrush. A cytohistologic evaluation.
    Risberg B; Andersson A; Zetterberg C; Nordin B
    J Reprod Med; 1997 Jul; 42(7):405-8. PubMed ID: 9252930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A randomized clinical trial comparing the Cytobrush and cotton swab for Papanicolaou smears.
    Koonings PP; Dickinson K; d'Ablaing G; Schlaerth JB
    Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Aug; 80(2):241-5. PubMed ID: 1635737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The quality of the Pap smear.
    Fokke HE; Salvatore CM; Schipper ME; Bleker OP
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 1992; 13(5):445-8. PubMed ID: 1486925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Improved endocervical sampling with the Cytobrush.
    Chalvardjian A; De Marchi WG; Bell V; Nishikawa R
    CMAJ; 1991 Feb; 144(3):313-7. PubMed ID: 1989710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Safety, efficacy and cost of three cervical cytology sampling devices in a prenatal clinic.
    Smith-Levitin M; Hernandez E; Anderson L; Heller P
    J Reprod Med; 1996 Oct; 41(10):749-53. PubMed ID: 8913977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of Cytobrush sampling, spatula sampling and combined Cytobrush-spatula sampling of the uterine cervix.
    Buntinx F; Boon ME; Beck S; Knottnerus JA; Essed GG
    Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):64-8. PubMed ID: 1994637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Analysis of five sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears.
    Boon ME; de Graaff Guilloud JC; Rietveld WJ
    Acta Cytol; 1989; 33(6):843-8. PubMed ID: 2588917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Endocervical detection of CIN. Cytobrush versus cotton.
    Schettino F; Sideri M; Cangini L; Candiani M; Zannoni E; Maggi R; Ferrari A
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 1993; 14(3):234-6. PubMed ID: 8508881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cervex-Brush and Cytobrush. Comparison of their ability to sample abnormal cells for cervical smears.
    Hutchinson M; Fertitta L; Goldbaum B; Hamza M; Vanerian S; Isenstein L
    J Reprod Med; 1991 Aug; 36(8):581-6. PubMed ID: 1941800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.