89 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20188486)
21. Extraneous tissue: a potential source for diagnostic error in surgical pathology.
Layfield LJ; Witt BL; Metzger KG; Anderson GM
Am J Clin Pathol; 2011 Nov; 136(5):767-72. PubMed ID: 22031316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Indications and immediate patient outcomes of pathology intraoperative consultations. College of American Pathologists/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Outcomes Working Group Study.
Zarbo RJ; Schmidt WA; Bachner P; Howanitz PJ; Meier FA; Schifman RB; Boone DJ; Herron RM
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1996 Jan; 120(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 8554440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Secondary case review methods and anatomic pathology culture.
Raab SS; Grzybicki DM
Am J Clin Pathol; 2010 Jun; 133(6):829-31. PubMed ID: 20472838
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Assessment of diagnostic accuracy and feasibility of dynamic telepathology in China.
Li X; Gong E; McNutt MA; Liu J; Li F; Li T; Anderson VM; Gu J
Hum Pathol; 2008 Feb; 39(2):236-42. PubMed ID: 17950781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Quality in surgical pathology communication and reporting.
Nakhleh RE
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2011 Nov; 135(11):1394-7. PubMed ID: 22032564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Surgical pathological second opinion in thyroid malignancy: impact on patients' management and prognosis.
Hamady ZZ; Mather N; Lansdown MR; Davidson L; Maclennan KA
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2005 Feb; 31(1):74-7. PubMed ID: 15642429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Non-neoplastic renal diseases are often unrecognized in adult tumor nephrectomy specimens: a review of 246 cases.
Henriksen KJ; Meehan SM; Chang A
Am J Surg Pathol; 2007 Nov; 31(11):1703-8. PubMed ID: 18059227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Quantifying the value of in-house consultation in surgical pathology.
Renshaw AA; Pinnar NE; Jiroutek MR; Young ML
Am J Clin Pathol; 2002 May; 117(5):751-4. PubMed ID: 12090424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Periodic review of pathology training program teaching files: a quality improvement study.
Martin MA; Hallmark KC; Sharkey FE
Am J Clin Pathol; 2010 Aug; 134(2):332-4. PubMed ID: 20660339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Clinician compliance with laboratory regulations requiring submission of relevant clinical data: A one year retrospective analysis.
Layfield LJ; Factor RE; Jarboe EA
Pathol Res Pract; 2012 Nov; 208(11):668-71. PubMed ID: 22999368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital.
Kronz JD; Westra WH; Epstein JI
Cancer; 1999 Dec; 86(11):2426-35. PubMed ID: 10590387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Recommendations for the reporting of tissues removed as part of the surgical treatment of common malignancies of the eye and its adnexa.
Folberg R; Salomao D; Grossniklaus HE; Proia AD; Rao NA; Cameron JD;
Mod Pathol; 2003 Jul; 16(7):725-30. PubMed ID: 12861070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Surgical pathology for the oncology patient in the age of standardization: of margins, micrometastasis, and molecular markers.
Compton CC
Semin Radiat Oncol; 2003 Oct; 13(4):382-8. PubMed ID: 14586828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. [Impact of pathological review by an expert on the diagnosis and management of patients with cancer in Aquitania].
Lapeyrere N; Parrens M; Coindre JM; Soubeyran I; de Mascarel A; Merlio JP; Lebail B; Lepreux S; Jaffre A; Gilleron V; Mathoulin-Pélissier S; Vergier B;
Ann Pathol; 2008 Dec; 28(6):478-85. PubMed ID: 19084716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. A preliminary diagnosis service provides prospective blinded dual-review of all general surgical pathology cases in an academic practice.
Weydert JA; De Young BR; Cohen MB
Am J Surg Pathol; 2005 Jun; 29(6):801-5. PubMed ID: 15897747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Measuring the value of review of pathology material by a second pathologist.
Renshaw AA; Gould EW
Am J Clin Pathol; 2006 May; 125(5):737-9. PubMed ID: 16707375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Second opinion pathology in liver biopsy interpretation.
Bejarano PA; Koehler A; Sherman KE
Am J Gastroenterol; 2001 Nov; 96(11):3158-64. PubMed ID: 11721765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Study of parameters to ensure quality control in histopathology reporting: a meta-analysis at a tertiary care center.
Qureshi A; Loya A; Azam M; Hussain M; Mushtaq S; Mahmood T
Indian J Pathol Microbiol; 2012; 55(2):180-2. PubMed ID: 22771639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Errors by surgical pathologists in India: results of a questionnaire survey.
Pai SA
Natl Med J India; 2003; 16(4):204-6. PubMed ID: 14606768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Surgical pathology specimen identification and accessioning: A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes Study of 1 004 115 cases from 417 institutions.
Nakhleh RE; Zarbo RJ
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1996 Mar; 120(3):227-33. PubMed ID: 8629896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
