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)

  • 41. Detection of unsuspected abnormalities by PAPNET-assisted review.
    Mitchell H; Medley G
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):260-4. PubMed ID: 9479349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 43. Rescreening of cervical Papanicolaou smears using PAPNET.
    Koss LG
    JAMA; 1998 Jun; 279(22):1786; author reply 1787-8. PubMed ID: 9628706
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. [An interlaboratory study of the use of PapNet in the quality control of cervico-vaginal cytology].
    Cosentino A; Ghidoni D; Salemi M; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Zani J; Grasso G; Bondi A
    Pathologica; 1999 Apr; 91(2):101-6. PubMed ID: 10484869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Comparison of Papnet-assisted and manual screening of cervical smears.
    Losell K; Dejmek A
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1999 Oct; 21(4):296-9. PubMed ID: 10495327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Cost analysis of PAPNET-assisted vs. conventional Pap smear evaluation in primary screening of cervical smears.
    Meerding WJ; Doornewaard H; van Ballegooijen M; Bos A; van der Graaf Y; van den Tweel JG; van der Schouw YT; Habbema JD
    Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 11213501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Rescreening of cervical Papanicolaou smears using PAPNET.
    Schechter CB
    JAMA; 1998 Jun; 279(22):1787; author reply 1787-8. PubMed ID: 9628708
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Rescreening of cervical Papanicolaou smears using PAPNET.
    Mango LJ; Radensky PW
    JAMA; 1998 Jun; 279(22):1786-7; author reply 1787-8. PubMed ID: 9628707
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Observer variation in cytologic grading for cervical dysplasia of Papanicolaou smears with the PAPNET testing system.
    Doornewaard H; van der Schouw YT; van der Graaf Y; Bos AB; van den Tweel JG
    Cancer; 1999 Aug; 87(4):178-83. PubMed ID: 10455204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Partial rescreening of all negative smears: an improved method of quality assurance in laboratories undertaking cervical screening.
    Faraker CA
    Cytopathology; 1993; 4(1):47-50. PubMed ID: 8453016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. [Impulse cytophotometric studies in cytologically suspicious cervical smears].
    Krug H; Kühndel K; Ebeling K
    Zentralbl Gynakol; 1977; 99(2):65-73. PubMed ID: 848203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Potentially difficult smears of women with squamous cell carcinoma pose fewer problems when PAPNET is used for primary screening.
    Kok MR; Schreiner-Kok PG; Van Der Veen G; Boon ME
    Cytopathology; 1999 Oct; 10(5):324-34. PubMed ID: 10588351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Simulation of primary cervical cancer screening by the PAPNET system in an unscreened, high-risk community.
    Michelow PM; Hlongwane NF; Leiman G
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):88-92. PubMed ID: 9022732
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Switching from neural networks (PAPNET) to the Imager (Hologic) for computer-assisted screening.
    Boon ME; Ouwerkerk-Noordam E; Meijer-Marres EM; Bontekoe TR
    Acta Cytol; 2011; 55(2):163-6. PubMed ID: 21325801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Papnet-assisted, primary screening of cervico-vaginal smears.
    Duggan MA
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2000; 21(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 10726616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Quality assurance in cervical smears: 100% rapid rescreening vs. 10% random rescreening.
    Amaral RG; Zeferino LC; Hardy E; Westin MC; Martinez EZ; Montemor EB
    Acta Cytol; 2005; 49(3):244-8. PubMed ID: 15966284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Automated cervical cytology: meta-analyses of the performance of the PAPNET system.
    Abulafia O; Sherer DM
    Obstet Gynecol Surv; 1999 Apr; 54(4):253-64. PubMed ID: 10198930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Accuracy comparison between PAPNET diagnoses and conventional diagnoses in an Italian cervical cytology laboratory.
    Ghidoni D; Fabbris E; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Medri M; Bucchi L; Bondi A
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1998 Oct; 19(4):279-83. PubMed ID: 9784992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Efficacy of automated cervical cytology screening.
    Slagel DD; Zaleski S; Cohen MB
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1995 Jul; 13(1):26-30. PubMed ID: 7587871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. PAPNET for cervical cytology screening. Experience in Greece.
    Veneti S; Papaefthimiou M; Symiakaki H; Ioannidou-Mouzaka L
    Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 9987447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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