BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

260 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18476988)

  • 1. Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control in a cervical screening programme.
    Tavares SB; de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
    Cytopathology; 2008 Aug; 19(4):254-9. PubMed ID: 18476988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Analysis of the intralaboratory diagnostic variability in the Imola cervical screening program].
    Fabbris E; Bucchi L; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Ghidoni D; Medri M; Bondi A
    Pathologica; 1998 Apr; 90(2):127-32. PubMed ID: 9619055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [The PAPNET system in the rescreening of negative cervical/vaginal smears. A study from the Imola cytology laboratory].
    Ghidoni D; Fabbris E; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Medri M; Bucchi L; Bondi A
    Pathologica; 1998 Aug; 90(4):357-63. PubMed ID: 9793395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Automated screening for quality control using PAPNET: a study of 638 negative Pap smears.
    Keyhani-Rofagha S; Palma T; O'Toole RV
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1996 Jun; 14(4):316-20. PubMed ID: 8725131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Evaluation of PAPNET--a semiautomated system used in the screening against cervical cancer].
    Hølund B; Ejersbo D; Hjortebjerg A
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1998 Sep; 160(40):5802-6. PubMed ID: 9782761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Significance of sources of error and quality control in cytologic mass screening].
    Zimmer S; Krahnert U; Munck C
    Zentralbl Gynakol; 1987; 109(4):209-17. PubMed ID: 3591056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Guidelines for the evaluation of internal quality control of smears for screening of uterine cancer in France in the structures of Pathologic Anatomy and Cytology. French Association for Quality Assurance in Pathologic Anatomy and Cytology (AFAQAP)--Commission for cervical smears].
    Albuisson F; Anger E; Baron V; Cartier I; Dorne H; Dubois-Gordeff A; Hassoun J; Jouannelle A; Labbé S; Locquet D; Marsan C; Martin E; Michiels-Marzias D; Molinié V; Mottot C; Mueller B; Vacher-Lavenu MC; Vincent S; Vuong PN
    Ann Pathol; 1998 Jul; 18(3):221-6. PubMed ID: 9750045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Quality and liability issues with the Papanicolaou smear: the problem of definition of errors and false-negative smears.
    Davey DD
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1997 Mar; 121(3):267-9. PubMed ID: 9111115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Paired cervical smears: a method of reducing the false-negative rate in population screening.
    Beilby JO; Bourne R; Guillebaud J; Steele ST
    Obstet Gynecol; 1982 Jul; 60(1):46-8. PubMed ID: 7088450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Cervical cancer screening. False negative smears].
    Vassilakos P; De Marval F; Muñoz M
    Rev Med Suisse Romande; 1997 Aug; 117(8):597-601. PubMed ID: 9340714
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [The PAPNET system in cytological rescreening of cervical smears].
    Cenci M; Nagar C; Giovagnoli MR; Vecchione A
    Minerva Ginecol; 1997 Apr; 49(4):139-45. PubMed ID: 9206764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Computer-assisted rescreening of cervicovaginal smears stained by the Papanicolaou method. Evaluation of the PAPNET system apropos of 225 cases].
    Vuong PN; Vacher-Lavenu MC; Marsan C; Baviera E
    Arch Anat Cytol Pathol; 1995; 43(3):147-53. PubMed ID: 7574913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Quality control in cytopathology applied to screening for cervical carcinoma.
    Marsan C
    Pol J Pathol; 1995; 46(4):245-8. PubMed ID: 8713292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The PAPNET system for quality control of cervical smears: validation and limits.
    Cenci M; Nagar C; Giovagnoli MR; Vecchione A
    Anticancer Res; 1997; 17(6D):4731-4. PubMed ID: 9494597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Results of AutoPap system-assisted and manual cytologic screening. A comparison.
    Wertlake P
    J Reprod Med; 1999 Jan; 44(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 9987733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Screening for cancer of the cervix. Program of the Central Region of Portugal].
    da Silva DP; Real O
    Acta Med Port; 1997 Oct; 10(10):643-52. PubMed ID: 9477587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Assessment of automated primary screening on PAPNET of cervical smears in the PRISMATIC trial. PRISMATIC Project Management Team.
    Lancet; 1999 Apr; 353(9162):1381-5. PubMed ID: 10227217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Automated prescreening of conventionally prepared cervical smears: a feasibility study.
    Bartoo GT; Lee JS; Bartels PH; Kiviat NB; Nelson AC
    Lab Invest; 1992 Jan; 66(1):116-22. PubMed ID: 1731146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Screening of cervical cancer, false negative vaginal smears].
    Weintraub D
    Rev Med Suisse Romande; 1997 Nov; 117(11):921. PubMed ID: 9471658
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Rapid screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control. For how long should we rescreen?
    Farrell DJ; Bilkhu S; Gibson LM; Cummings L; Wadehra V
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(2):251-60. PubMed ID: 9100751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.