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 *

98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8770538)

  • 1. Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnoses.
    Mitchell H; Medley G
    Cytopathology; 1995 Dec; 6(6):368-75. PubMed ID: 8770538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Differences between false-negative and true-positive Papanicolaou smears on Papnet-assisted review.
    Mitchell H; Medley G
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1998 Aug; 19(2):138-40. PubMed ID: 9702494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cellular differences between true negative and false negative Papanicolaou smears.
    Mitchell H; Medley G
    Cytopathology; 1993; 4(5):285-90. PubMed ID: 8274666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cervical cytology screening history of women diagnosed with adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix: a case-control study.
    Mitchell H; Hocking J; Saville M
    Acta Cytol; 2004; 48(5):595-600. PubMed ID: 15471249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Significant reduction in the rate of false-negative cervical smears with neural network-based technology (PAPNET Testing System).
    Koss LG; Sherman ME; Cohen MB; Anes AR; Darragh TM; Lemos LB; McClellan BJ; Rosenthal DL; Keyhani-Rofagha S; Schreiber K; Valente PT
    Hum Pathol; 1997 Oct; 28(10):1196-203. PubMed ID: 9343327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A more accurate measure of the false-negative rate of Papanicolaou smear screening is obtained by determining the false-negative rate of the rescreening process.
    Renshaw AA; DiNisco SA; Minter LJ; Cibas ES
    Cancer; 1997 Oct; 81(5):272-6. PubMed ID: 9349513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Detection of false negative Pap smears by rapid reviewing. A metaanalysis.
    Arbyn M; Schenck U
    Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(6):949-57. PubMed ID: 11127751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Papanicolaou smear sensitivity for adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix. A study of 34 cases.
    Lee KR; Minter LJ; Granter SR
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1997 Jan; 107(1):30-5. PubMed ID: 8980364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: a comparative review of original and automated rescreen diagnosis of cervicovaginal smears with long term follow-up.
    Stastny JF; Remmers RE; London WB; Pedigo MA; Cahill LA; Ryan M; Frable WJ
    Cancer; 1997 Dec; 81(6):348-53. PubMed ID: 9438460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The determination of Papanicolaou smear adequacy using a semiquantitative method to evaluate cellularity.
    Valente PT; Schantz HD; Trabal JF
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1991; 7(6):576-80. PubMed ID: 1769285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. False-negative Papanicolaou smears from women with cancerous and precancerous lesions of the uterine cervix.
    Pairwuti S
    Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):40-6. PubMed ID: 1994633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Laboratory reliability of the Papanicolaou smear.
    Yobs AR; Swanson RA; Lamotte LC
    Obstet Gynecol; 1985 Feb; 65(2):235-44. PubMed ID: 3969236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and invasive carcinoma following the report of three negative Papanicolaou smears: screening failures or rapid progression?
    Sherman ME; Kelly D
    Mod Pathol; 1992 May; 5(3):337-42. PubMed ID: 1495939
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. PAPNET-assisted rescreening of cervical smears: cost and accuracy compared with a 100% manual rescreening strategy.
    O'Leary TJ; Tellado M; Buckner SB; Ali IS; Stevens A; Ollayos CW
    JAMA; 1998 Jan; 279(3):235-7. PubMed ID: 9438746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Liquid-based Papanicolaou smears without a transformation zone component: should clinicians worry?
    Baer A; Kiviat NB; Kulasingam S; Mao C; Kuypers J; Koutsky LA
    Obstet Gynecol; 2002 Jun; 99(6):1053-9. PubMed ID: 12052599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The characteristics of false negative cervical smears--implications for the UK cervical cancer screening programme.
    Baker RW; O'Sullivan JP; Hanley J; Coleman DV
    J Clin Pathol; 1999 May; 52(5):358-62. PubMed ID: 10560356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Detection of false-negative Papanicolaou smears by rapid rescreening in a large routine cervical cytology laboratory.
    Wright RG; Halford JA; Ditchmen EJ
    Pathology; 1999 Nov; 31(4):379-81. PubMed ID: 10643010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An analysis of the factors involved in the colposcopic evaluation of 2194 patients with abnormal Papanicolaou smears.
    Wetrich DW
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1986 Jun; 154(6):1339-49. PubMed ID: 3717244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. ThinPrep Pap Test. Accuracy for glandular disease.
    Ashfaq R; Gibbons D; Vela C; Saboorian MH; Iliya F
    Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):81-5. PubMed ID: 9987455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.