118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1731146)
21. Liquid-based cytology for cervical cancer screening.
Bentz JS
Expert Rev Mol Diagn; 2005 Nov; 5(6):857-71. PubMed ID: 16255628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. The diagnostic value of computer-assisted primary cervical smear screening: a longitudinal cohort study.
Doornewaard H; van der Schouw YT; van der Graaf Y; Bos AB; Habbema JD; van den Tweel JG
Mod Pathol; 1999 Nov; 12(11):995-1000. PubMed ID: 10574595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Image cytometry in automated cervical screening.
van Driel-Kulker AM; Ploem-Zaaijer JJ
Anal Cell Pathol; 1989 Feb; 1(1):63-77. PubMed ID: 2488701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Contextual analysis and intermediate cell markers enhance high-resolution cell image analysis for automated cervical smear diagnosis.
Zahniser DJ; Wong KL; Brenner JF; Ball HG; Garcia GL; Hutchinson ML
Cytometry; 1991; 12(1):10-4. PubMed ID: 1705494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [Computer-assisted cervical screening].
van Kemenade FJ; Beerman H
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2011; 155(18):A2998. PubMed ID: 21466727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. An image analysing method for automated cytologic prescreening of cervix carcinoma and its prestages: demonstration and preliminary results.
Kunze KD; Herrmann WR; Meyer W
Arch Geschwulstforsch; 1978; 48(2):131-9. PubMed ID: 686977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Automated screening of conventional gynecological cytology smears: feasible and reliable.
Saieg MA; Motta TH; Fodra ME; Scapulatempo C; Longatto-Filho A; Stiepcich MM
Acta Cytol; 2014; 58(4):378-82. PubMed ID: 25195537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. [Impulse cytophotometry in neoplasm prevention. The behavior of normal vaginal smears in the impulse cytophotometric histogram].
Weiss D; Hölzl M; Orgas H; Häffele R; Gade J
Fortschr Med; 1976 Jun; 94(16):968-70. PubMed ID: 964854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Accuracy and perceptions of virtual microscopy compared with glass slide microscopy in cervical cytology.
Evered A; Dudding N
Cytopathology; 2011 Apr; 22(2):82-7. PubMed ID: 20482714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Comparison of three different methods for automated classification of cervical cells.
Palcic B; MacAulay C; Shlien S; Treurniet W; Tezcan H; Anderson G
Anal Cell Pathol; 1992 Nov; 4(6):429-41. PubMed ID: 1280993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. A sample preparation for automated cervical cancer screening.
Husain OA; Page-Roberts BA; Millet JA
Acta Cytol; 1978; 22(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 77625
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Evaluation of the AutoCyte SCREEN system in a clinical cytopathology laboratory.
Bishop JW; Cheuvront DA; Sims KL
Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(2):128-36. PubMed ID: 10740595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Adaptation of CytoProcessor for cervical cancer screening of challenging slides.
Crowell EF; Bazin C; Thurotte V; Elie H; Jitaru L; Olivier G; Caillot Y; Brixtel R; Lesner B; Toutain M; Renouf A
Diagn Cytopathol; 2019 Sep; 47(9):890-897. PubMed ID: 31111676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. The characteristics of false negative cervical smears--implications for the UK cervical cancer screening programme.
Baker RW; O'Sullivan JP; Hanley J; Coleman DV
J Clin Pathol; 1999 May; 52(5):358-62. PubMed ID: 10560356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. An evaluation of 'rapid review' as a method of quality control of cervical smears using the AxioHOME microscope.
Baker RW; Wadsworth J; Brugal G; Coleman DV
Cytopathology; 1997 Apr; 8(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 9134333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Individual estimated sensitivity and workload for manual screening of SurePath gynecologic cytology.
Ellis K; Renshaw AA; Dudding N
Diagn Cytopathol; 2012 Feb; 40(2):95-7. PubMed ID: 22246923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The use of an automated image cytometer for screening and quantitative assessment of cervical lesions in the British Columbia Cervical Smear Screening Programme.
Anderson G; Macaulay C; Matisic J; Garner D; Palcic B
Cytopathology; 1997 Oct; 8(5):298-312. PubMed ID: 9313982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Computer-assisted primary screening of cervical smears using the PAPNET method: comparison with conventional screening and evaluation of the role of the cytologist.
Ouwerkerk-Noordam E; Boon ME; Beck S
Cytopathology; 1994 Aug; 5(4):211-8. PubMed ID: 7948757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
