199 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20472840)
1. The development and testing of a laboratory information system-driven tool for pre-sign-out quality assurance of random surgical pathology reports.
Owens SR; Dhir R; Yousem SA; Kelly SM; Piccoli A; Wiehagen L; Lassige K; Parwani AV
Am J Clin Pathol; 2010 Jun; 133(6):836-41. PubMed ID: 20472840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Initial experience with a novel pre-sign-out quality assurance tool for review of random surgical pathology diagnoses in a subspecialty-based university practice.
Owens SR; Wiehagen LT; Kelly SM; Piccoli AL; Lassige K; Yousem SA; Dhir R; Parwani AV
Am J Surg Pathol; 2010 Sep; 34(9):1319-23. PubMed ID: 20697250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Surgical pathology sign-out. Routine review of every case by a second pathologist.
Safrin RE; Bark CJ
Am J Surg Pathol; 1993 Nov; 17(11):1190-2. PubMed ID: 8214266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Virtual slide telepathology for an academic teaching hospital surgical pathology quality assurance program.
Graham AR; Bhattacharyya AK; Scott KM; Lian F; Grasso LL; Richter LC; Carpenter JB; Chiang S; Henderson JT; Lopez AM; Barker GP; Weinstein RS
Hum Pathol; 2009 Aug; 40(8):1129-36. PubMed ID: 19540562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quality assurance in anatomic pathology.
Rickert RR
Clin Lab Med; 1986 Dec; 6(4):697-706. PubMed ID: 3539481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Interinstitutional comparison of frozen section consultation in small hospitals: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 18,532 frozen section consultation diagnoses in 233 small hospitals.
Novis DA; Gephardt GN; Zarbo RJ;
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1996 Dec; 120(12):1087-93. PubMed ID: 15456172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mandatory second opinion in surgical pathology referral material: clinical consequences of major disagreements.
Manion E; Cohen MB; Weydert J
Am J Surg Pathol; 2008 May; 32(5):732-7. PubMed ID: 18360282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Critical values in pediatric surgical pathology: definition, implementation, and reporting in a children's hospital.
Coffin CM; Spilker K; Lowichik A; Zhou H; Nielson K; Erickson L; Pysher TJ
Am J Clin Pathol; 2007 Dec; 128(6):1035-40. PubMed ID: 18024330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Core components of a comprehensive quality assurance program in anatomic pathology.
Nakhleh RE
Adv Anat Pathol; 2009 Nov; 16(6):418-23. PubMed ID: 19851132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. In-house daily consensus conference: an important quality control/quality assurance activity--experience at a major referral center.
Khurshid A; Ahmad Z; Qureshi A
Indian J Pathol Microbiol; 2009; 52(3):325-7. PubMed ID: 19679952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Amended reports in surgical pathology and implications for diagnostic error detection and avoidance: a College of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 1,667,547 accessioned cases in 359 laboratories.
Nakhleh RE; Zarbo RJ
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1998 Apr; 122(4):303-9. PubMed ID: 9648896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effectiveness of random and focused review in detecting surgical pathology error.
Raab SS; Grzybicki DM; Mahood LK; Parwani AV; Kuan SF; Rao UN
Am J Clin Pathol; 2008 Dec; 130(6):905-12. PubMed ID: 19019767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Discrepancy analysis, communication, and feedback for cytotechnologist quality improvement of nongynecologic cytopathology.
Whigham P; Ilario MJ; Flanagan MB; Mauser N; Raab SS; Ohori NP
Diagn Cytopathol; 2006 Apr; 34(4):265-9. PubMed ID: 16544333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Critical values in surgical pathology.
Pereira TC; Liu Y; Silverman JF
Am J Clin Pathol; 2004 Aug; 122(2):201-5. PubMed ID: 15323136
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Detection and classification of diagnostic discrepancies (errors) in surgical pathology.
Roy JE; Hunt JL
Adv Anat Pathol; 2010 Sep; 17(5):359-65. PubMed ID: 20733354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Database construction for improving patient safety by examining pathology errors.
Grzybicki DM; Turcsanyi B; Becich MJ; Gupta D; Gilbertson JR; Raab SS
Am J Clin Pathol; 2005 Oct; 124(4):500-9. PubMed ID: 16146808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Measuring errors in surgical pathology in real-life practice: defining what does and does not matter.
Renshaw AA; Gould EW
Am J Clin Pathol; 2007 Jan; 127(1):144-52. PubMed ID: 17145620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
