170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8453016)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. [Partial re-screening of all negative smears. A method of quality control of pathology department concerning smear screening against cervix cancer].
Jensen ML; Dybdahl H; Svanholm H
Ugeskr Laeger; 2000 May; 162(21):3024-7. PubMed ID: 10850190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Rapid screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control. For how long should we rescreen?
Farrell DJ; Bilkhu S; Gibson LM; Cummings L; Wadehra V
Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(2):251-60. PubMed ID: 9100751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Rapid rescreening of cervical smears: an improved method of quality control.
Dudding N
Cytopathology; 1995 Apr; 6(2):95-9. PubMed ID: 7795170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of 100% rapid rescreening of negative cervical smears as a quality assurance measure.
Manrique EJ; Amaral RG; Souza NL; Tavares SB; Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC
Cytopathology; 2006 Jun; 17(3):116-20. PubMed ID: 16719853
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An assessment of partial rescreening as an internal quality control method for cervical smears.
Johnson SJ; Hair T; Gibson L; Ridley B; Wadehra V
Cytopathology; 1995 Dec; 6(6):376-87. PubMed ID: 8770539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Rapid review (partial rescreening) of cervical cytology. Four years experience and quality assurance implications.
Faraker CA; Boxer ME
J Clin Pathol; 1996 Jul; 49(7):587-91. PubMed ID: 8813961
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Rapid review.
Faraker CA
Cytopathology; 1998 Apr; 9(2):71-6. PubMed ID: 9660635
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Improvement in the routine screening of cervical smears: A study using rapid prescreening and 100% rapid review as internal quality control methods.
Tavares SB; Alves de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; Pinheiro de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
Cancer Cytopathol; 2011 Dec; 119(6):367-76. PubMed ID: 21954191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Cervical cancer screening. False negative smears].
Vassilakos P; De Marval F; Muñoz M
Rev Med Suisse Romande; 1997 Aug; 117(8):597-601. PubMed ID: 9340714
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The sensitivity of rapid (partial) review of cervical smears.
Shield PW; Cox NC
Cytopathology; 1998 Apr; 9(2):84-92. PubMed ID: 9577734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Sensitivity of primary screening by rapid review: 'to act or not to act on the results, that is the question'.
Slater DN
Cytopathology; 1998 Apr; 9(2):77-83. PubMed ID: 9577733
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Rapid rescreening.
Rubin A
Cytopathology; 1998 Apr; 9(2):141-2. PubMed ID: 9577744
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Internal quality assurance of sensitivity of primary screening.
Boxer ME
Cytopathology; 1998 Oct; 9(5):349-50. PubMed ID: 9800134
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. 100% rapid (partial) rescreening for quality assurance.
Lemay C; Meisels A
Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):86-8. PubMed ID: 9987456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of the 10% rescreen of negative gynecologic smears as a quality assurance measure.
Tabbara SO; Sidawy MK
Diagn Cytopathol; 1996 Feb; 14(1):84-6. PubMed ID: 8834084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Internal quality assurance in cervical cytology one laboratory's experience.
Cross PA
Cytopathology; 1996 Feb; 7(1):25-31. PubMed ID: 8833871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
