134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7770246)
1. Computerized colposcopy: results of a pilot study and analysis of its clinical relevance.
Cristoforoni PM; Gerbaldo D; Perino A; Piccoli R; Montz FJ; Capitanio GL
Obstet Gynecol; 1995 Jun; 85(6):1011-6. PubMed ID: 7770246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of Colposcopic Impression Based on Live Colposcopy and Evaluation of Static Digital Images.
Liu AH; Gold MA; Schiffman M; Smith KM; Zuna RE; Dunn ST; Gage JC; Walker JL; Wentzensen N
J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2016 Apr; 20(2):154-61. PubMed ID: 27015261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Colposcopy quality control by remote review of digitized colposcopic images.
Ferris DG; Litaker MS;
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Dec; 191(6):1934-41. PubMed ID: 15592275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The efficacy of telecolposcopy compared with traditional colposcopy.
Ferris DG; Macfee MS; Miller JA; Litaker MS; Crawley D; Watson D
Obstet Gynecol; 2002 Feb; 99(2):248-54. PubMed ID: 11814505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) in colposcopy: evaluation of a pilot study.
Mehlhorn G; Kage A; Münzenmayer C; Benz M; Koch MC; Beckmann MW; Wittenberg T
Anticancer Res; 2012 Dec; 32(12):5221-6. PubMed ID: 23225419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Interobserver agreement for colposcopy quality control using digitized colposcopic images during the ALTS trial.
Ferris DG; Litaker M;
J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2005 Jan; 9(1):29-35. PubMed ID: 15870519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Discrepancy between colposcopy, punch biopsy and final histology of cone specimen: a prospective study.
Petousis S; Christidis P; Margioula-Siarkou C; Sparangis N; Athanasiadis A; Kalogiannidis I
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2018 May; 297(5):1271-1275. PubMed ID: 29442140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Agreement between colposcopic impression and histological diagnosis among human papillomavirus type 16-positive women: a clinical trial using dynamic spectral imaging colposcopy.
Zaal A; Louwers JA; Berkhof J; Kocken M; Ter Harmsel WA; Graziosi GC; Spruijt JW; Balas C; Papagiannakis E; Snijders PJ; Meijer CJ; van Kemenade FJ; Verheijen RH
BJOG; 2012 Apr; 119(5):537-44. PubMed ID: 22304443
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Strength of correlations between colposcopic impression and biopsy histology.
Massad LS; Collins YC
Gynecol Oncol; 2003 Jun; 89(3):424-8. PubMed ID: 12798706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Colposcopic evaluation of pre-invasive and early cervical carcinoma with histologic correlation.
Shahida SM; Mirza TT; Saleh AF; Islam MA
Mymensingh Med J; 2012 Apr; 21(2):200-6. PubMed ID: 22561759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Agreement between colposcopic diagnosis and cervical pathology: Siriraj hospital experience.
Tatiyachonwiphut M; Jaishuen A; Sangkarat S; Laiwejpithaya S; Wongtiraporn W; Inthasorn P; Viriyapak B; Warnnissorn M
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2014; 15(1):423-6. PubMed ID: 24528068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of accuracy and reproducibility of colposcopic impression based on a single image versus a two-minute time series of colposcopic images.
Perkins R; Jeronimo J; Hammer A; Novetsky A; Guido R; Del Pino M; Louwers J; Marcus J; Resende C; Smith K; Egemen D; Befano B; Smith D; Antani S; de Sanjose S; Schiffman M
Gynecol Oncol; 2022 Oct; 167(1):89-95. PubMed ID: 36008184
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Microcolposcopy vs colposcopy in evaluating abnormal Pap smear. Comparison with histological findings.
Framarino dei Malatesta ML; Carraro C; Silvestrini I; Marzetti L; Vecchione A
Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol; 1993; 20(4):236-40. PubMed ID: 8281705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of the accuracy of colposcopy in detecting high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion and cervical cancer.
Ruan Y; Liu M; Guo J; Zhao J; Niu S; Li F
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2020 Dec; 302(6):1529-1538. PubMed ID: 32808113
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Histologic correlation between smartphone and coloposcopic findings in patients with abnormal cervical cytology: experiences in a tertiary referral hospital.
Tanaka Y; Ueda Y; Kakubari R; Kakuda M; Kubota S; Matsuzaki S; Okazawa A; Egawa-Takata T; Matsuzaki S; Kobayashi E; Kimura T
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Sep; 221(3):241.e1-241.e6. PubMed ID: 31075244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Histological diagnosis and evaluation of the Swede score colposcopic system in a large cohort of pregnant women with atypical cervical cytology or cervical malignancy signs.
Kärrberg C; Ryd W; Strander B; Brännström M; Rådberg T
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2012 Aug; 91(8):952-8. PubMed ID: 22582977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A prospective study to evaluate the correlation between Reid colposcopic index impression and biopsy histology.
Mousavi AS; Fakour F; Gilani MM; Behtash N; Ghaemmaghami F; Karimi Zarchi M
J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2007 Jul; 11(3):147-50. PubMed ID: 17596759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Appraisal of the modalities used to evaluate an initial abnormal Papanicolaou smear.
Higgins RV; Hall JB; McGee JA; Laurent S; Alvarez RD; Partridge EE
Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Aug; 84(2):174-8. PubMed ID: 8041525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Computerized colposcopy and conservative management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in pregnancy.
Mikhail MS; Anyaegbunam A; Romney SL
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 1995 May; 74(5):376-8. PubMed ID: 7778432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Development and validation of an artificial intelligence system for grading colposcopic impressions and guiding biopsies.
Xue P; Tang C; Li Q; Li Y; Shen Y; Zhao Y; Chen J; Wu J; Li L; Wang W; Li Y; Cui X; Zhang S; Zhang W; Zhang X; Ma K; Zheng Y; Qian T; Ng MTA; Liu Z; Qiao Y; Jiang Y; Zhao F
BMC Med; 2020 Dec; 18(1):406. PubMed ID: 33349257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
