These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6683215)

  • 1. Studies on the distribution of abnormal cells in cytologic preparations. VI. Pressure exerted by the gynecologist during smearing.
    Rubio CA; Stormby N; Kock Y; Thomassen P
    Gynecol Oncol; 1983 Jun; 15(3):391-5. PubMed ID: 6683215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Studies on the distribution of abnormal cells in cytologic preparations. V. The gradient of cell deposition on slides.
    Rubio CA; Kock Y
    Obstet Gynecol; 1981 Jun; 57(6):754-8. PubMed ID: 7231829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Studies of the distribution of abnormal cells in cytologic preparations. I. Making the smear with a wooden spatula.
    Rubio CA; Kock Y; Berglund K
    Acta Cytol; 1980; 24(1):49-53. PubMed ID: 6928335
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Studies on the distribution of abnormal cells in cytologic preparations. III. Making the smear with a plastic spatula.
    Rubio CA; Berglund K; Kock Y; Zetterberg A
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1980 Aug; 137(7):843-6. PubMed ID: 6996484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Studies on the distribution of abnormal cells in cytological preparations II. Making the smear with the cotton swab applicator.
    Rubio CA; Kock Y; Berglund K; Thomassen P
    Gynecol Oncol; 1980 Apr; 9(2):127-34. PubMed ID: 7189498
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Studies on the distribution of abnormal cells in cytological smears. VII. Cervical brush versus plastic and wooden spatulas.
    Rubio CA; Kock Y; Stormby N; Porwit A
    Gynecol Oncol; 1990 Nov; 39(2):167-70. PubMed ID: 2227590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Significance of cytologic smears in the diagnosis of small cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix.
    Kim Y; Ha HJ; Kim JS; Chung JH; Koh JS; Park S; Lee SS
    Acta Cytol; 2002; 46(4):637-44. PubMed ID: 12146023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. The false negative smear. II. The trapping effect of collecting instruments.
    Rubio CA
    Obstet Gynecol; 1977 May; 49(5):576-80. PubMed ID: 850573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Pap test--with or without vaginal smear?
    Milicić-Juhas V; Perić M; Pajtler M; Prvulović I; Curzik D
    Coll Antropol; 2010 Mar; 34(1):69-74. PubMed ID: 20437636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Computer-assisted cervical screening].
    van Kemenade FJ; Beerman H
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2011; 155(18):A2998. PubMed ID: 21466727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Collection devices for cervicovaginal cytology: a comparison.
    Dighe S; Ajit D
    Acta Cytol; 2005; 49(4):416-20. PubMed ID: 16124171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of the PAPNET cytologic screening system for quality control of cervical smears.
    Koss LG; Lin E; Schreiber K; Elgert P; Mango L
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1994 Feb; 101(2):220-9. PubMed ID: 8116579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effectiveness and safety of two cervical cytologic techniques during pregnancy.
    Stillson T; Knight AL; Elswick RK
    J Fam Pract; 1997 Aug; 45(2):159-63. PubMed ID: 9267375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Small cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix: cytologic findings in 13 cases.
    Zhou C; Hayes MM; Clement PB; Thomson TA
    Cancer; 1998 Oct; 84(5):281-8. PubMed ID: 9801202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The efficiency of the Cytobrush versus the cotton swab in the collection of endocervical cells in cervical smears.
    Trimbos JB; Arentz NP
    Acta Cytol; 1986; 30(3):261-3. PubMed ID: 3521175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [The use of the cervix brush for early diagnosis of cervix uteri cancer: quality of the smear].
    Weyler J; Engels H
    Arch Belg; 1989; 47(1-4):81-4. PubMed ID: 2610580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Two techniques for cervical smear sampling.
    Prescrire Int; 2010 Aug; 19(108):176. PubMed ID: 20939455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Would monolayers provide more representative samples and improved preparations for cervical screening? Overview and evaluation of systems available.
    McGoogan E; Reith A
    Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(1):107-19. PubMed ID: 8604562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.