134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23610913)
21. Outcomes in cervical screening using various cytology technologies: what's age got to do with it?
Barken SS; Rebolj M; Lynge E; Junge J; Rygaard C
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2013 Jul; 22(4):367-73. PubMed ID: 22976387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Liquid-based cytology test use by office-based physicians: United States, 2006-2007.
Hing E; Saraiya M; Roland KB
Natl Health Stat Report; 2011 Jun; (40):1-6. PubMed ID: 21692417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Past experience of SUUB's Pathology Department in classic based cervico-vaginal cytology.
Lăzăroiu AM; Comănescu M; Moldovan V; Secară D; Cîrstoiu M; Sajin M; Stoian M; Anton G
Rom J Morphol Embryol; 2009; 50(4):619-23. PubMed ID: 19942956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Efficacy of visual inspection of the cervix using acetic acid in cervical cancer screening: a comparison with cervical cytology.
Akinola OI; Fabamwo AO; Oshodi YA; Banjo AA; Odusanya O; Gbadegesin A; Tayo A
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2007 Oct; 27(7):703-5. PubMed ID: 17999297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Sentinel Pap smears in 261 invasive cervical cancer patients in Italy.
Igidbashian S; Maggioni A; Casadio C; Boveri S; Cristoforoni P; Sideri M
Vaccine; 2009 May; 27 Suppl 1():A34-8. PubMed ID: 19480959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Comparison between Siriraj liquid-based and conventional cytology for detection of abnormal cervicovaginal smears: a split-sample study.
Laiwejpithaya S; Rattanachaiyanont M; Benjapibal M; Khuakoonratt N; Boriboonhirunsarn D; Laiwejpithaya S; Sangkarat S; Wongtiraporn W
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2008; 9(4):575-80. PubMed ID: 19256741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [Comparison of the ThinPrep monolayer technique and conventional cervical Pap smears in a high-risk population using the Munich II nomenclature].
Lellé RJ; Cordes A; Regidor M; Maier E; Flenker H
Gynakol Geburtshilfliche Rundsch; 2007; 47(2):81-7. PubMed ID: 17440269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. A 1-year experience with liquid-based and conventional papanicolaou smear in Thammasat University Hospital.
Suwannarurk K; Bhamarapravatana K; Thaweekul Y; Mairaing K; Poomtavorn Y; Pattaraarchachai J
J Med Assoc Thai; 2011 Dec; 94 Suppl 7():S47-51. PubMed ID: 22619906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparison of ThinPrep and SurePath liquid-based cytology and subsequent human papillomavirus DNA testing in China.
Zhao FH; Hu SY; Bian JJ; Liu B; Peck RB; Bao YP; Pan QJ; Frappart L; Sellors J; Qiao YL
Cancer Cytopathol; 2011 Dec; 119(6):387-94. PubMed ID: 21774094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparison of visual inspection of cervix and Pap smear for cervical cancer screening.
Tayyeb R; Khawaja NP; Malik N
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2003 Apr; 13(4):201-3. PubMed ID: 12718787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Proposed Sheffield quantitative criteria in cervical cytology to assist the diagnosis and grading of squamous intra-epithelial lesions, as some Bethesda system definitions require amendment.
Slater DN; Rice S; Stewart R; Melling SE; Hewer EM; Smith JH
Cytopathology; 2005 Aug; 16(4):168-78. PubMed ID: 16048503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Dutch solutions for liquid-based cytology: analysis of unsatisfactory slides and HPV testing of equivocal cytology.
Boon ME; Rijkaart DC; Ouwerkerk-Noordam E; Korporaal H
Diagn Cytopathol; 2006 Sep; 34(9):644-8. PubMed ID: 16900471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Screening test results associated with cancer diagnoses in 287 women with cervical squamous cell carcinoma.
Li Z; Austin RM; Guo M; Zhao C
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 2012 Dec; 136(12):1533-40. PubMed ID: 22900617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Two techniques for cervical smear sampling.
Prescrire Int; 2010 Aug; 19(108):176. PubMed ID: 20939455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Early detection of precursors of cervical cancer with cervical cytology and visual inspection of cervix with acetic Acid.
Dhaubhadel P; Vaidya A; Choudhary P
JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc; 2008; 47(170):71-6. PubMed ID: 18709035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Evaluation of agreement between conventional and liquid-based cytology in cervical cancer early detection based on analysis of 2,091 smears: experience at the Brazilian National Cancer Institute.
Girianelli VR; Santos Thuler LC
Diagn Cytopathol; 2007 Sep; 35(9):545-9. PubMed ID: 17703446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. [New version of the pathology practice guideline for cervical cytology: sharpened criteria for adequacy; expanded use of new techniques].
van Kemenade FJ; Wiersma T; Helmerhorst TJ
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2007 Jun; 151(23):1283-6. PubMed ID: 17624158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. [A falsely reassuring cervical smear in adenocarcinoma of the external os].
Rooker D; Baalbergen A; Helmerhorst TJ
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2008 Apr; 152(17):977-80. PubMed ID: 18549169
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Cytohistologic correlation rates between conventional Papanicolaou smears and ThinPrep cervical cytology: a comparison.
Chacho MS; Mattie ME; Schwartz PE
Cancer; 2003 Jun; 99(3):135-40. PubMed ID: 12811853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Pap Test Reporting Rates for Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Cervical Cytology from the Largest Academic Women's Hospital in China: Analysis of 1,248,785 Pap Test Reports.
Tao X; Austin RM; Zhang H; Zhang L; Xiao J; Wang L; Zhou X; Zhao C
Acta Cytol; 2015; 59(6):445-51. PubMed ID: 26789332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
