70 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8167098)
1. An analysis of the variation of human interpretation: Papnet a mini-challenge.
Husain OA; Butler EB; Nayagam M; Mango L; Alonzo A
Anal Cell Pathol; 1994 Feb; 6(2):157-63. PubMed ID: 8167098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. The PAPNET system for quality control of cervical smears: validation and limits.
Cenci M; Nagar C; Giovagnoli MR; Vecchione A
Anticancer Res; 1997; 17(6D):4731-4. PubMed ID: 9494597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The false-negative fraction for Papanicolaou smears: how often are "abnormal" smears not detected by a "standard" screening cytologist?
Naryshkin S
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1997 Mar; 121(3):270-2. PubMed ID: 9111116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reducing the error rate in Papanicolaou smears. One laboratory's experience with the PAPNET system.
Koss LG
Physician Assist; 1994 Dec; 18(12):48-52. PubMed ID: 10139375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [The PAPNET system in cytological rescreening of cervical smears].
Cenci M; Nagar C; Giovagnoli MR; Vecchione A
Minerva Ginecol; 1997 Apr; 49(4):139-45. PubMed ID: 9206764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Quality and liability issues with the Papanicolaou smear: the problem of definition of errors and false-negative smears.
Davey DD
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1997 Mar; 121(3):267-9. PubMed ID: 9111115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [The PAPNET system in the rescreening of negative cervical/vaginal smears. A study from the Imola cytology laboratory].
Ghidoni D; Fabbris E; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Medri M; Bucchi L; Bondi A
Pathologica; 1998 Aug; 90(4):357-63. PubMed ID: 9793395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Automated screening for quality control using PAPNET: a study of 638 negative Pap smears.
Keyhani-Rofagha S; Palma T; O'Toole RV
Diagn Cytopathol; 1996 Jun; 14(4):316-20. PubMed ID: 8725131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Evaluation of PAPNET--a semiautomated system used in the screening against cervical cancer].
Hølund B; Ejersbo D; Hjortebjerg A
Ugeskr Laeger; 1998 Sep; 160(40):5802-6. PubMed ID: 9782761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Inadequate cervical smears: results of an educational slide exchange scheme. Trent Gynaecological Pathology Quality Assurance Group.
Cytopathology; 1999 Feb; 10(1):16-24. PubMed ID: 10068883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Neural network processing of cervical smears can lead to a decrease in diagnostic variability and an increase in screening efficacy: a study of 63 false-negative smears.
Boon ME; Kok LP; Nygaard-Nielsen M; Holm K; Holund B
Mod Pathol; 1994 Dec; 7(9):957-61. PubMed ID: 7892166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The diagnostic value of computer-assisted primary cervical smear screening: a longitudinal cohort study.
Doornewaard H; van der Schouw YT; van der Graaf Y; Bos AB; Habbema JD; van den Tweel JG
Mod Pathol; 1999 Nov; 12(11):995-1000. PubMed ID: 10574595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Automation of cytological analysis of cervical smears].
Cenci M; Giovagnoli MR; Olla SV; Drusco A; Vecchione A
Minerva Ginecol; 1999; 51(7-8):291-8. PubMed ID: 10536424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Analysis of the intralaboratory diagnostic variability in the Imola cervical screening program].
Fabbris E; Bucchi L; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Ghidoni D; Medri M; Bondi A
Pathologica; 1998 Apr; 90(2):127-32. PubMed ID: 9619055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A randomized crossover trial of PAPNET for primary cervical screening.
Irwig L; Macaskill P; Farnsworth A; Wright RG; McCool J; Barratt A; Simpson JM
J Clin Epidemiol; 2004 Jan; 57(1):75-81. PubMed ID: 15019013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Blinded review of papanicolaou smears.
Frable WJ
Cancer; 2004 Jun; 102(3):133-5. PubMed ID: 15211470
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
