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.
62. 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]
63. Cervical screening. Vyvyan V Aust Nurs J; 1995 Apr; 2(9):20-2. PubMed ID: 7627325 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
64. Cervical screening: what is the point? Robertson J; Woodend B Lancet; 1995 Jul; 346(8969):245; author reply 246-7. PubMed ID: 7616812 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
65. Is improved detection of adenocarcinoma in situ by screening a key to reducing the incidence of cervical adenocarcinoma? Syrjänen K Acta Cytol; 2004; 48(5):591-4. PubMed ID: 15471248 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
66. Cervical cancer screening in the central region of Portugal. Real O; Silva D; Leitão MA; Oliveira HM; Rocha Alves JG Eur J Cancer; 2000 Nov; 36(17):2247-9. PubMed ID: 11072214 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
68. [Experience in the organization of cytologic studies during preventive mass surveys of the female population of the Chuvash ASSR]. Kuz'min VI; Sergeeva GA; Vissarionova RI; Pokrovskaia EG; Konstantinova VV Lab Delo; 1988; (1):63-4. PubMed ID: 2451082 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
69. Is proficiency testing in cervical cytology proficient? Herbert A J Clin Pathol; 1997 Jul; 50(7):536-7. PubMed ID: 9306928 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
71. Variation in the assessment of adequacy in cervical smears. Migliore G; Rossi E; Aldovini A; Mudu P; Alderisio M; Giovagnoli MR; Fabiano A; Morosini PL; Branca M Cytopathology; 2001 Dec; 12(6):377-82. PubMed ID: 11843939 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. The status of cytologic screening of the female population of greater new orleans in 1968. Holmquist ND; Cucchiara RF; Hackney WP J La State Med Soc; 1969 Aug; 121(8):256-9. PubMed ID: 5801020 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
73. The cytologic detection of preclinical carcinoma of the uterine cervix. Soule EH Minn Med; 1968 Apr; 51(4):507-9. PubMed ID: 5689182 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
74. Role of re-screening of cervical smears in internal quality control. Baker A; Melcher D; Smith R J Clin Pathol; 1995 Nov; 48(11):1002-4. PubMed ID: 8543619 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting and criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology. Dalla Palma P Cytopathology; 1997 Jun; 8(3):210. PubMed ID: 9202897 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
77. Inadequate follow up for abnormal cervical smears. Gambi A; Grilli N; Gentilini F; Monti C J Med Screen; 1994 Jan; 1(1):74. PubMed ID: 8790489 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
78. [Data processing in the planning, organization and evaluation of cytologic cancer prevention examinations]. Schneider ML; Soost HJ; Stolley H Methods Inf Med Suppl; 1976; 8():371-6. PubMed ID: 1078511 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]