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. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Assessment of automated primary screening on PAPNET of cervical smears in the PRISMATIC trial. PRISMATIC Project Management Team. Lancet; 1999 Apr; 353(9162):1381-5. PubMed ID: 10227217 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Detection of false-negative Pap smears using the PAPNET system. Troni GM; Cipparrone I; Cariaggi MP; Ciatto S; Miccinesi G; Zappa M; Confortini M Tumori; 2000; 86(6):455-7. PubMed ID: 11218185 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. PAPNET-assisted primary screening of conventional cervical smears. Cenci M; Nagar C; Vecchione A Anticancer Res; 2000; 20(5C):3887-9. PubMed ID: 11268471 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]