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.
4. Cervical cancer detected by cervicography in a patient with negative cervical cytology. Spitzer M; Krumholz BA; Seltzer VL; Molho L Obstet Gynecol; 1986 Sep; 68(3 Suppl):68S-70S. PubMed ID: 3737083 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Review of negative Papanicolaou tests. Is the retrospective 5-year review necessary? Allen KA; Zaleski S; Cohen MB Am J Clin Pathol; 1994 Jan; 101(1):19-21. PubMed ID: 8279450 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Improving the accuracy of Pap smears. Evans TC Postgrad Med; 1997 Sep; 102(3):63. PubMed ID: 9300017 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Update on the Papanicolaou smear: new issues for the 1990s. Ollayos CW Mil Med; 1997 Aug; 162(8):521-3. PubMed ID: 9271901 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A selection of monitoring parameters for gynecologic cytology-Beacons of light for quality assurance. Auger M Cancer Cytopathol; 2014 Jan; 122(1):3-4. PubMed ID: 24203215 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. A decade has passed...the Pap smear and cervical cancer. Linder J Am J Clin Pathol; 1997 Nov; 108(5):492-8. PubMed ID: 9353086 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Quality and liability issues with the Papanicolaou smear. Sirota RL Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1997 Dec; 121(12):1237-8. PubMed ID: 9431309 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. False-negative cytology rates in patients in whom invasive cervical cancer subsequently developed. Morell ND; Taylor JR; Snyder RN; Ziel HK; Saltz A; Willie S Obstet Gynecol; 1982 Jul; 60(1):41-5. PubMed ID: 7088449 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The false-negative fraction: a statistical method to measure the efficacy of cervical smear screening laboratories. Dolinar J; Ollayos CW; Tellado M; Ali I; Stevens A; Paquette C; Brodbelt S Mil Med; 1999 Jun; 164(6):410-1. PubMed ID: 10377709 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. GYN cytology--is the glass full or half empty? Barlow JF S D J Med; 1991 Apr; 44(4):90. PubMed ID: 1871579 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Papanicolaou smear sensitivity for adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. A study of 34 cases. Lee KR; Minter LJ; Granter SR Am J Clin Pathol; 1997 Jan; 107(1):30-5. PubMed ID: 8980364 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. The adequate Papanicolaou smear revisited. Greening SE Diagn Cytopathol; 1985; 1(1):55-8. PubMed ID: 3836072 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnoses. Mitchell H; Medley G Cytopathology; 1995 Dec; 6(6):368-75. PubMed ID: 8770538 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Cytohistologic correlation rates between conventional Papanicolaou smears and ThinPrep cervical cytology: a comparison. Chacho MS; Mattie ME; Schwartz PE Cancer; 2003 Jun; 99(3):135-40. PubMed ID: 12811853 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]