145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31543564)
1. Comparison of Papanicolaou Smear Quality with the Anatomical Spatula and the Cytobrush-Spatula: A Single-Blind Clinical Trial.
Rabiu KA; Nzeribe-Abangwu UO; Akinlusi FM; Alausa TG; Durojaiye IA
Niger Med J; 2019; 60(3):126-132. PubMed ID: 31543564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of pap smear quality with anatomical spatula method and the common method (spatula-cytobrush): a single blind clinical trial.
Soleimani M; Abdali Kh; Khajehei M; Tabatabaee HR; Komar PV; Riaz Montazer N
Iran J Cancer Prev; 2012; 5(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 25780537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Papanicolaou smear adequacy: the cervical cytobrush and Ayre spatula compared with the extended-tip spatula.
Noel ML
J Am Board Fam Pract; 1989; 2(3):156-60. PubMed ID: 2665423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of Pap smear quality with anatomical spatula and convenience (spatula-cytobrush) methods: a single blind clinical trial.
Abdali K; Soleimani M; Khajehei M; Tabatabaee HR; Komar PV; Montazer NR
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2010; 11(6):1769-72. PubMed ID: 21338231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of cytobrush with cotton swab for endocervical cytologic sampling.
Neinstein LS; Rabinovitz S; Recalde A
J Adolesc Health Care; 1989 Jul; 10(4):305-7. PubMed ID: 2732111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Collection devices for obtaining cervical cytology samples.
Martin-Hirsch P; Jarvis G; Kitchener H; Lilford R
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2000; (3):CD001036. PubMed ID: 10908482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A randomized clinical trial comparing the Cytobrush and cotton swab for Papanicolaou smears.
Koonings PP; Dickinson K; d'Ablaing G; Schlaerth JB
Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Aug; 80(2):241-5. PubMed ID: 1635737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The Cytobrush effect on Pap smear adequacy.
Davey-Sullivan B; Gearhart J; Evers CG; Cason Z; Replogle WH
Fam Pract Res J; 1991 Mar; 11(1):57-64. PubMed ID: 2028815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluation of the endocervical Cytobrush and Cervex-Brush in pregnant women.
Paraiso MF; Brady K; Helmchen R; Roat TW
Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Oct; 84(4):539-43. PubMed ID: 8090390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of cytobrush with Cervex-Brush for endocervical cytologic sampling.
Neinstein LS; Church J; Akiyoshi T
J Adolesc Health; 1992 Sep; 13(6):520-3. PubMed ID: 1390820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Consequences of the introduction of combined spatula and Cytobrush sampling for cervical cytology. Improvements in smear quality and detection rates.
Boon ME; Alons-van Kordelaar JJ; Rietveld-Scheffers PE
Acta Cytol; 1986; 30(3):264-70. PubMed ID: 3521176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A randomized comparison of the 3 Papanicolaou smear collection methods.
Kavak ZN; Eren F; Pekin S; Küllü S
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 1995 Nov; 35(4):446-9. PubMed ID: 8717577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Collection devices for obtaining cervical cytology samples.
Martin-Hirsch P; Jarvis G; Kitchener H; Lilford R
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2000; 2000(2):CD001036. PubMed ID: 10796736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Papanicolaou test collection with the Papette brush or the spatula with cytobrush: A pragmatic study.
O'Laughlin DJ; Strelow BA; Fellows NA; Stevens JN; Kelsey EA; Fink SR; Peters SM; Johnson JA; Houghton JP; Stolp AM; Fischer KM; Tweedy JM; DeJesus RS
Womens Health (Lond); 2023; 19():17455057231170975. PubMed ID: 37119034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cervical cytology: a randomized comparison of four sampling methods.
McCord ML; Stovall TG; Meric JL; Summitt RL; Coleman SA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1992 Jun; 166(6 Pt 1):1772-7; discussion 1777-9. PubMed ID: 1615986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improved endocervical sampling with the Cytobrush.
Chalvardjian A; De Marchi WG; Bell V; Nishikawa R
CMAJ; 1991 Feb; 144(3):313-7. PubMed ID: 1989710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The Cell-Sweep. A new cervical cytology sampling device.
Tyau L; Hernandez E; Anderson L; Heller P; Edmonds P
J Reprod Med; 1994 Nov; 39(11):899-902. PubMed ID: 7853282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Should the Cytobrush be used in routine screening for cervical pathology?
van Erp EJ; Dersjant-Roorda MC; Arentz NP; Stijnen T; Trimbos JB
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 1989 Oct; 30(2):139-44. PubMed ID: 2572484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Performance of the Cytobrush in patients at risk for cervical pathology: does it add anything to the wooden spatula?
Van Erp EJ; Blaschek-Lut CH; Arentz NP; Trimbos JB
Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 1988; 9(6):456-60. PubMed ID: 3234423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of Cytobrush sampling, spatula sampling and combined Cytobrush-spatula sampling of the uterine cervix.
Buntinx F; Boon ME; Beck S; Knottnerus JA; Essed GG
Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):64-8. PubMed ID: 1994637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
