75 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21994194)
1. 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]
2. Individual estimated sensitivity and workload for manual screening of SurePath gynecologic cytology.
Ellis K; Renshaw AA; Dudding N
Diagn Cytopathol; 2012 Feb; 40(2):95-7. PubMed ID: 22246923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. HSIL, epithelial cell abnormality-adjusted workload, and the Thinprep imaging system.
Renshaw AA; Elsheikh TM
Diagn Cytopathol; 2012 Mar; 40(3):201-3. PubMed ID: 22334521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Sensitivity and workload for manual and automated gynecologic screening: best current estimates.
Renshaw AA; Elsheikh TM
Diagn Cytopathol; 2011 Sep; 39(9):647-50. PubMed ID: 20945459
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, epithelial cell abnormality-adjusted workload, and the ThinPrep imaging system.
Renshaw AA; Elsheikh TM
Diagn Cytopathol; 2012 Aug; 40(8):698-700. PubMed ID: 22807385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Measuring the significance of workload on performance of cytotechnologists in gynecologic cytology: a study using rapid prescreening.
Deschenes M; Renshaw AA; Auger M
Cancer; 2008 Jun; 114(3):149-54. PubMed ID: 18412150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Liquid-based cervical cytology.
Klinkhamer PJ; Meerding WJ; Rosier PF; Hanselaar AG
Cancer; 2003 Oct; 99(5):263-71. PubMed ID: 14579292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
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 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]
13. FocalPoint slide classification algorithms show robust performance in classification of high-grade lesions on SurePath liquid-based cervical cytology slides.
Parker EM; Foti JA; Wilbur DC
Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Feb; 30(2):107-10. PubMed ID: 14755762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Results of the implementation of liquid-based cytology-SurePath in the Ontario screening program.
Colgan TJ; McLachlin CM; Cotterchio M; Howlett R; Seidenfeld AM; Mai VM
Cancer; 2004 Dec; 102(6):362-7. PubMed ID: 15481083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Trends in Cervical Cytology Screening and Reporting Practices: Results From the College of American Pathologists 2011 PAP Education Supplemental Questionnaire.
Crothers BA; Darragh TM; Tambouret RH; Nayar R; Barkan GA; Zhao C; Booth CN; Padmanabhan V; Tabatabai ZL; Souers RJ; Thomas N; Wilbur DC; Moriarty AT
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2016 Jan; 140(1):13-21. PubMed ID: 26046490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Assessment of manual workload limits in gynecologic cytology: reconciling data from 3 major prospective trials of automated screening devices.
Renshaw AA; Elsheikh TM
Am J Clin Pathol; 2013 Apr; 139(4):428-33. PubMed ID: 23525612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Rapid prescreening is as effective at reducing screening error as postscreening with the FocalPoint automated screening device.
Wilgenbusch H; Mueller G; Neal M; Renshaw AA
Diagn Cytopathol; 2011 Nov; 39(11):818-21. PubMed ID: 20949451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Resolving ASCUS without recourse to HPV testing: manual reprocessing of residual automated liquid-based cytology (ALBC) material using manual liquid-based cytology (MLBC).
Maksem JA; Bedrossian CW; Kurtycz D; Sewall S; Shalkham J; Dhanwada V; Lind H; Bibbo M; Weidmann J; Kane B; Shi Fu Y
Diagn Cytopathol; 2005 Dec; 33(6):434-40. PubMed ID: 16299747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
