90 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20151428)
1. Increasing cytotechnologist workload above 100 slides per day using the ThinPrep imaging system leads to significant reductions in screening accuracy.
Elsheikh TM; Kirkpatrick JL; Cooper MK; Johnson ML; Hawkins AP; Renshaw AA
Cancer Cytopathol; 2010 Apr; 118(2):75-82. PubMed ID: 20151428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Assisted primary screening using the automated ThinPrep Imaging System.
Biscotti CV; Dawson AE; Dziura B; Galup L; Darragh T; Rahemtulla A; Wills-Frank L
Am J Clin Pathol; 2005 Feb; 123(2):281-7. PubMed ID: 15842055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Use of the ThinPrep Imaging System for internal quality control of cervical cytology.
Heard T; Chandra A; Culora G; Gupta SS; Herbert A; Morgan M
Cytopathology; 2013 Aug; 24(4):246-53. PubMed ID: 22937891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Time consumed by microscopic and nonmicroscopic tasks in image-assisted gynecologic screening: Implications for workload assessment.
Renshaw AA; Underwood D; Aramoni G; Cash B; Croyle M; Deeds D; Dolar S; Gmitro S; Ray N; Sabo D; Shorie JA; Springer B; Weber Moffsinger D; Elsheikh TM
Cancer Cytopathol; 2016 Jul; 124(7):501-7. PubMed ID: 26970244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. American Society of Cytopathology workload recommendations for automated Pap test screening: developed by the productivity and quality assurance in the era of automated screening task force.
Elsheikh TM; Austin RM; Chhieng DF; Miller FS; Moriarty AT; Renshaw AA;
Diagn Cytopathol; 2013 Feb; 41(2):174-8. PubMed ID: 22351120
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Automated screening versus manual screening: a comparison of the ThinPrep imaging system and manual screening in a time study.
Schledermann D; Hyldebrandt T; Ejersbo D; Hoelund B
Diagn Cytopathol; 2007 Jun; 35(6):348-52. PubMed ID: 17497655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Predicting screening sensitivity from workload in gynecologic cytology: a review.
Renshaw AA; Elsheikh TM
Diagn Cytopathol; 2011 Nov; 39(11):832-6. PubMed ID: 21994194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Increasing cytotechnologist workload above 100 slides per day using the BD FocalPoint GS imaging system negatively affects screening performance.
Levi AW; Galullo P; Gordy K; Mikolaiski N; Schofield K; Elsheikh TM; Harigopal M; Chhieng DC
Am J Clin Pathol; 2012 Dec; 138(6):811-5. PubMed ID: 23161714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Becton Dickinson FocalPoint GS Imaging System: clinical trials demonstrate significantly improved sensitivity for the detection of important cervical lesions.
Wilbur DC; Black-Schaffer WS; Luff RD; Abraham KP; Kemper C; Molina JT; Tench WD
Am J Clin Pathol; 2009 Nov; 132(5):767-75. PubMed ID: 19846820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A feasibility study of the AutoPap system location-guided screening.
Lee JS; Kuan L; Oh S; Patten FW; Wilbur DC
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):221-6. PubMed ID: 9479344
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Effectiveness of the Thin Prep Imaging System in the detection of adenocarcinoma of the gynecologic system.
Friedlander MA; Rudomina D; Lin O
Cancer; 2008 Feb; 114(1):7-12. PubMed ID: 18085633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Performance of a semiautomated Papanicolaou smear screening system: results of a population-based study conducted in Guanacaste, Costa Rica.
Sherman ME; Schiffman M; Herrero R; Kelly D; Bratti C; Mango LJ; Alfaro M; Hutchinson ML; Mena F; Hildesheim A; Morales J; Greenberg MD; Balmaceda I; Lorincz AT
Cancer; 1998 Oct; 84(5):273-80. PubMed ID: 9801201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of pap smears.
Arbyn M; Schenck U; Ellison E; Hanselaar A
Cancer; 2003 Feb; 99(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 12589640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Does the time of day or weekday affect screening accuracy? A pilot correlation study with cytotechnologist workload and abnormal rate detection using the ThinPrep Imaging System.
Elsheikh TM; Kirkpatrick JL; Fischer D; Herbert KD; Renshaw AA
Cancer Cytopathol; 2010 Feb; 118(1):41-6. PubMed ID: 20099317
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Controls in quality assessment in gynecologic cytology: A rational approach to workload limits for the ThinPrep imaging system.
Renshaw AA; Elsheikh TM
Diagn Cytopathol; 2010 Oct; 38(10):772-5. PubMed ID: 20091901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effectiveness of AutoPap system location-guided screening in the evaluation of cervical cytology smears.
Stevens MW; Milne AJ; Parkinson IH; Nespolon WW; Fazzalari NL; Arora N; Dodd TJ
Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Aug; 31(2):94-9. PubMed ID: 15282720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. One hundred percent thorough quality control rescreening of liquid-based monolayers in cervicovaginal cytopathology.
Rowe LR; Marshall CJ; Bentz JS
Cancer; 2002 Dec; 96(6):325-9. PubMed ID: 12478679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of screening times between the ThinPrep Imager and conventional cytology.
Boost T
Diagn Cytopathol; 2009 Sep; 37(9):661-4. PubMed ID: 19459203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
