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 *

178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7574913)

  • 21. Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control in a cervical screening programme.
    Tavares SB; de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
    Cytopathology; 2008 Aug; 19(4):254-9. PubMed ID: 18476988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of PAPNET-assisted cervical rescreening.
    Doornewaard H; Woudt JM; Strubbe P; van de Seijp H; van den Tweel JG
    Cytopathology; 1997 Oct; 8(5):313-21. PubMed ID: 9313983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. [Partial re-screening of all negative smears. A method of quality control of pathology department concerning smear screening against cervix cancer].
    Jensen ML; Dybdahl H; Svanholm H
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2000 May; 162(21):3024-7. PubMed ID: 10850190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Evaluation of PAPNET system for rescreening of negative cervical smears.
    Ashfaq R; Liang Y; Saboorian MH
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1995 Jul; 13(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 7587873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Neural-network-assisted analysis and microscopic rescreening in presumed negative cervical cytologic smears. A comparison.
    Mango LJ; Valente PT
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):227-32. PubMed ID: 9479345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Quality control of cervical cytology in high-risk women. PAPNET system compared with manual rescreening.
    Bergeron C; Masseroli M; Ghezi A; Lemarie A; Mango L; Koss LG
    Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(2):151-7. PubMed ID: 10740599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Comparison of the cervical cytology test using the PAPNET method and conventional microscopy.
    Weissbrod D; Torres M; Rodríguez A; Ureña I; Estrada J; Reyes ME; Carreto AJ
    Bull Pan Am Health Organ; 1996 Dec; 30(4):339-47. PubMed ID: 9041745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Computer-assisted rescreening of clinically important false negative cervical smears using the PAPNET Testing System.
    Rosenthal DL; Acosta D; Peters RK
    Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(1):120-6. PubMed ID: 8604564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Results of AutoPap system-assisted and manual cytologic screening. A comparison.
    Wertlake P
    J Reprod Med; 1999 Jan; 44(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 9987733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [Value of a computer-assisted screening method (PAPNET) for the detection of infectious cervico-uterine smears].
    Bernier M; Bergemer AM; Got C; Marsan C
    Arch Anat Cytol Pathol; 1998; 46(3):184-7. PubMed ID: 9754374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. PAPNET. The human and other dimensions.
    Husain OA; Kocjan G; Butler EB; McGloin JE
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(5):1439-44. PubMed ID: 9305381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Quality assurance in cervical cytology screening. Comparison of rapid rescreening and the PAPNET Testing System.
    Halford JA; Wright RG; Ditchmen EJ
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):79-81. PubMed ID: 9022730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Quality control in cytopathology applied to screening for cervical carcinoma.
    Marsan C
    Pol J Pathol; 1995; 46(4):245-8. PubMed ID: 8713292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluation of the PAPNET system in a general pathology service.
    Farnsworth A; Chambers FM; Goldschmidt CS
    Med J Aust; 1996 Oct; 165(8):429-31. PubMed ID: 8913244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Prospective and randomised public-health trial on neural network-assisted screening for cervical cancer in Finland: results of the first year.
    Nieminen P; Hakama M; Viikki M; Tarkkanen J; Anttila A
    Int J Cancer; 2003 Jan; 103(3):422-6. PubMed ID: 12471627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. An approach to the problem of false negatives in gynecologic cytologic screening.
    Hindman WM
    Acta Cytol; 1989; 33(6):814-8. PubMed ID: 2686323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. New tests for cervical cancer screening.
    Nuovo J; Melnikow J; Howell LP
    Am Fam Physician; 2001 Sep; 64(5):780-6. PubMed ID: 11563569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. PAPNET computer-aided rescreening for detection of benign and malignant glandular elements in cervicovaginal smears: a review of 61 cases.
    Sturgis CD; Isoe C; McNeal NE; Yu GH; DeFrias DV
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1998 Apr; 18(4):307-11. PubMed ID: 9557269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Prospective study of PAPNET: review of 25,656 Pap smears negative on manual screening and rapid rescreening.
    Halford JA; Wright RG; Ditchmen EJ
    Cytopathology; 1999 Oct; 10(5):317-23. PubMed ID: 10588350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Computer-assisted cervical cancer screening using neural networks.
    Mango LJ
    Cancer Lett; 1994 Mar; 77(2-3):155-62. PubMed ID: 8168062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.