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.
107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18000255)
1. Rules of engagement. Lofsky S; Howlett R Can Fam Physician; 2007 Nov; 53(11):1883-4. PubMed ID: 18000255 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. The effects of different sampling techniques on smear quality and the diagnosis of cytological abnormalities in cervical screening. Williamson SL; Hair T; Wadehra V Cytopathology; 1997 Jun; 8(3):188-95. PubMed ID: 9202894 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Too early to solve Pap device puzzle. Check W CAP Today; 1997 Jun; 11(6):1, 44-6, 48-9 passim. PubMed ID: 10174227 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. [Is the HPV test to supplement vaginal smears in menopausal women?]. Gustavsson I; Gyllensten U; Lindell M; Wilander E Lakartidningen; 2010 Feb 24-Mar 2; 107(8):528-9. PubMed ID: 20384066 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Specimen adequacy of ThinPrep sample preparations in a direct-to-vial study. Corkill M; Knapp D; Martin J; Hutchinson ML Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):39-44. PubMed ID: 9022724 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Stanley F. Patten, Jr., M.D., Ph.D. and the development of an automated Papanicolaou smear screening system. Lee JS; Nelson AC Cancer; 1997 Dec; 81(6):332-6. PubMed ID: 9438457 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. The Italian experience of a Pap test and speculoscopy based screening programme. Ciatto S J Med Screen; 2001; 8(1):54. PubMed ID: 11373851 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Monolayer slide preparation and automated slide reading systems for cervical cancer screening--clinical-effectiveness analysis. Tecnologica MAP Suppl; 1998 Feb; ():34-9. PubMed ID: 10183359 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. The cost-effectiveness of three new technologies to enhance Pap testing. Tecnologica MAP Suppl; 1998 Feb; ():40-1. PubMed ID: 10183360 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Low-cost technology for screening uterine cervical cancer. Parashari A; Singh V; Sehgal A; Satyanarayana L; Sodhani P; Gupta MM Bull World Health Organ; 2000; 78(8):964-7. PubMed ID: 10994279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [The importance of the Cytopipette for the performance of serial tests]. Koch F Krebsarzt; 1967; 22(3):145-55. PubMed ID: 5592987 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The primary screening clinical trials of the TriPath AutoPap System. Wilbur DC; Norton MK Epidemiology; 2002 May; 13 Suppl 3():S30-3. PubMed ID: 12071481 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Screening of cervical cancer: where do we go from here? Kuo DY; Goldberg GL Cancer Invest; 2003; 21(1):157-61. PubMed ID: 12643017 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Liquid-based cytology in cervical screening: a rapid and systematic review. Payne N; Chilcott J; McGoogan E Health Technol Assess; 2000; 4(18):1-73. PubMed ID: 10932023 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Automated rescreening in cervical cytology. Mathematical models for evaluating overall process sensitivity, specificity and cost. Kaminsky FC; Benneyan JC; Mullins DL Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):209-23. PubMed ID: 9022745 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. New cervical cancer screening techniques. McNeeley SG Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2003 Oct; 189(4 Suppl):S40-1. PubMed ID: 14586319 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]