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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8498145)

  • 21. Quality control in cervical cancer screening: Brazilian experience.
    Collaço LM; de Noronha L; Bleggi-Torres LF; Pinheiro DL
    Acta Cytol; 2005; 49(6):694-6. PubMed ID: 16450916
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [On the occasion of the 65th birthday of the cervical smear: added value of population studies for cervical cancer remains unclear].
    Giard RW
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2007 Jun; 151(23):1268-71. PubMed ID: 17624154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Smear tests: déjà vu.
    Nottingham J
    BMJ; 2001 Sep; 323(7311):517. PubMed ID: 11560149
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Guidelines for the evaluation of internal quality control of smears for screening of uterine cancer in France in the structures of Pathologic Anatomy and Cytology. French Association for Quality Assurance in Pathologic Anatomy and Cytology (AFAQAP)--Commission for cervical smears].
    Albuisson F; Anger E; Baron V; Cartier I; Dorne H; Dubois-Gordeff A; Hassoun J; Jouannelle A; Labbé S; Locquet D; Marsan C; Martin E; Michiels-Marzias D; Molinié V; Mottot C; Mueller B; Vacher-Lavenu MC; Vincent S; Vuong PN
    Ann Pathol; 1998 Jul; 18(3):221-6. PubMed ID: 9750045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Quality assurance in cervical cytopathology.
    Llewellyn H
    Cytopathology; 1997 Oct; 8(5):349-50; author reply 353-4. PubMed ID: 9313988
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. [More effective screening prevents cervical cancer].
    Rylander E
    Lakartidningen; 1996 Jan; 93(5):345-8. PubMed ID: 8628063
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Report of a national workshop on screening for cancer of the cervix.
    Rasaiah B
    CMAJ; 1992 Apr; 146(8):1279-80; author reply 1280, 1284-5. PubMed ID: 1622496
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Quality assurance in cervical cytopathology.
    Coleman DV; Baker R
    Cytopathology; 1997 Oct; 8(5):350-3; author reply 353-4. PubMed ID: 9313989
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [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]  

  • 31. [HPV test makes cytological examination more accurate. Cervical cancer can be discovered more efficiently].
    Andersson S; Hjerpe A; Johansson BC; Hagmar B
    Lakartidningen; 2007 Sep 26-Oct 2; 104(39):2797-9. PubMed ID: 17958005
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [Recommendations from the experimental sites for implementing organized cervical cancer screening in France].
    Baudier F; Schapman S; Giordanella JP
    Sante Publique; 2000 May; 12 Spec No():71-88. PubMed ID: 10989630
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Does the increased sensitivity of the new Papanicolaou (Pap) tests improve the cost-effectiveness of screening for cervical cancer?
    Reust CE
    J Fam Pract; 2001 Feb; 50(2):175. PubMed ID: 11219567
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Rapid pre-screening of Pap smears in quality control: an Italian experience.
    Placidi A; Manca G; Mania E; Arbyn M
    Cytopathology; 2004 Apr; 15(2):121-3. PubMed ID: 15056176
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Using urbanization profiles to assess screening performance.
    Boon ME; Kok LP
    Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Apr; 30(4):243-6. PubMed ID: 15048958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. With an eye toward patient care.
    Selvaggi SM
    Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Apr; 30(4):217-9. PubMed ID: 15048953
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [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]  

  • 38. Receiver operating characteristic curves for analysis of the results of cervicovaginal smears. A useful quality improvement tool.
    Renshaw AA; Dean BR; Cibas ES
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1997 Sep; 121(9):968-75. PubMed ID: 9302930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [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]  

  • 40. [Organized improvement of cervix cancer prevention].
    Andrae B; Elfgren K; Strander B
    Lakartidningen; 2008 Feb 6-12; 105(6):378-9. PubMed ID: 18380357
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.