145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17186503)
1. The Bethesda Interobserver Reproducibility Study (BIRST): a web-based assessment of the Bethesda 2001 System for classifying cervical cytology.
Sherman ME; Dasgupta A; Schiffman M; Nayar R; Solomon D
Cancer; 2007 Feb; 111(1):15-25. PubMed ID: 17186503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bethesda Interobserver Reproducibility Study-2 (BIRST-2): Bethesda System 2014.
Kurtycz DFI; Staats PN; Chute DJ; Russell D; Pavelec D; Monaco SE; Friedlander MA; Wilbur DC; Nayar R
J Am Soc Cytopathol; 2017; 6(4):131-144. PubMed ID: 31043266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The Bethesda System. A proposal for reporting abnormal cervical smears based on the reproducibility of cytopathologic diagnoses.
Sherman ME; Schiffman MH; Erozan YS; Wacholder S; Kurman RJ
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1992 Nov; 116(11):1155-8. PubMed ID: 1444745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Proposed Sheffield quantitative criteria in cervical cytology to assist the diagnosis and grading of squamous intra-epithelial lesions, as some Bethesda system definitions require amendment.
Slater DN; Rice S; Stewart R; Melling SE; Hewer EM; Smith JH
Cytopathology; 2005 Aug; 16(4):168-78. PubMed ID: 16048503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Triage of women with ASCUS and LSIL cytology: use of qualitative assessment of p16INK4a positive cells to identify patients with high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
Wentzensen N; Bergeron C; Cas F; Vinokurova S; von Knebel Doeberitz M
Cancer; 2007 Feb; 111(1):58-66. PubMed ID: 17186505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Reproducibility of cytologic diagnosis: study of CRISAP Ile-de-France].
Barrès D; Bergeron C
Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2000 Feb; 28(2):120-6. PubMed ID: 10758586
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Interobserver variability in cytologic subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesions--the Bethesda System vs. World Health Organization classification.
Pajtler M; Audy-Jurković S; Milicić-Juhas V; Staklenac B; Pauzar B
Coll Antropol; 2006 Mar; 30(1):137-42. PubMed ID: 16617588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Glandular cell atypia on Papanicolaou smears: interobserver variability in the diagnosis and prediction of cell of origin.
Simsir A; Hwang S; Cangiarella J; Elgert P; Levine P; Sheffield MV; Roberson J; Talley L; Chhieng DC
Cancer; 2003 Dec; 99(6):323-30. PubMed ID: 14681938
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Use of p63 for distinction of glandular versus squamous lesions in cervicovaginal specimens.
Garcia MT; Acar BC; Jorda M; Gomez-Fernandez C; Ganjei-Azar P
Cancer; 2007 Feb; 111(1):54-7. PubMed ID: 17173320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance (AGUS): Interobserver reproducibility in cervical smears and corresponding thin-layer preparations.
Lee KR; Darragh TM; Joste NE; Krane JF; Sherman ME; Hurley LB; Allred EM; Manos MM
Am J Clin Pathol; 2002 Jan; 117(1):96-102. PubMed ID: 11789738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of the more restrictive definition of atypical squamous cells introduced by the 2001 Bethesda System on the sensitivity and specificity of the Papanicolaou test: a 5-year follow-up study of Papanicolaou tests originally interpreted as ASCUS, reclassified according to Bethesda 2001 criteria.
Thrall MJ; Pambuccian SE; Stelow EB; McKeon DM; Miller L; Savik K; Gulbahce HE
Cancer; 2008 Jun; 114(3):171-9. PubMed ID: 18454461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Subdividing atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance according to the Australian modified Bethesda, system: analysis of outcomes.
Roberts JM; Thurloe JK; Bowditch RC; Laverty CR
Cancer; 2000 Apr; 90(2):87-95. PubMed ID: 10794157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Problems encountered with the Bethesda System: the University of Iowa experience.
Bottles K; Reiter RC; Steiner AL; Zaleski S; Bedrossian CW; Johnson SR
Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Sep; 78(3 Pt 1):410-4. PubMed ID: 1876375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interobserver agreement in the assessment of components of colposcopic grading.
Massad LS; Jeronimo J; Schiffman M;
Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Jun; 111(6):1279-84. PubMed ID: 18515509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Interobserver agreement in the interpretation of anal intraepithelial neoplasia.
Lytwyn A; Salit IE; Raboud J; Chapman W; Darragh T; Winkler B; Tinmouth J; Mahony JB; Sano M
Cancer; 2005 Apr; 103(7):1447-56. PubMed ID: 15726546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Diagnostic concordance in gynecologic cytology].
Lazcano Ponce EC; de Ruiz PA; Martínez Arias C; Murguía Riechers L
Rev Invest Clin; 1997; 49(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 9380963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: recommendations for clinical management of abnormal cervical cytology, part 1.
Jordan J; Arbyn M; Martin-Hirsch P; Schenck U; Baldauf JJ; Da Silva D; Anttila A; Nieminen P; Prendiville W
Cytopathology; 2008 Dec; 19(6):342-54. PubMed ID: 19040546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women: lessons learned from human Papillomavirus DNA testing.
Johnston EI; Logani S
Cancer; 2007 Jun; 111(3):160-5. PubMed ID: 17506090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The use of digital images to evaluate the interobserver agreement on cervical smear readings in Italian cervical cancer screening.
Tinacci G; Biggeri A; Pellegrini A; Cariaggi MP; Schiboni ML; Confortini M
Cytopathology; 2011 Apr; 22(2):75-81. PubMed ID: 20482719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. BSCC, Bethesda or other? Terminology in cervical cytology European panel discussion.
Kocjan G; Priollet BC; Desai M; Koutselini H; Mahovlic V; Oliveira MH; Pohar-Marinsek Z; Sauer T; Schenk U; Shabalova I; Herbert A
Cytopathology; 2005 Jun; 16(3):113-9. PubMed ID: 15924605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
