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.
106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8958471)
1. Interlaboratory reproducibility in reporting inadequate cervical smears--a multicentre multinational study. Ciatto S; Cariaggi MP; Minuti AP; Confortini M; Palli D; Pas L; McKee G; Schenck U; Bonaccorsi A; Corradi G; Olivati S; Pieri L; Carretti D; Cocchi V Cytopathology; 1996 Dec; 7(6):386-90. PubMed ID: 8958471 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. [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]
4. Daily peer review of abnormal cervical smears in the assessment of individual practice as an additional method of internal quality control. Confortini M; Di Stefano C; Biggeri A; Bulgaresi P; Di Claudio G; Grisotto L; Maddau C; Matucci M; Petreschi C; Troni GM; Turco P; Foxi P Cytopathology; 2016 Feb; 27(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 25123613 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Interlaboratory quality control in gynecologic cytopathology using the novel CONQUISTADOR software. Interobserver reproducibility in the Latin American screening study. Alderisio M; Branca M; Erzen M; Longatto-Filho A; Derchain S; Tatti S; Vighi S; Roteli-Martins C; Leoncini L; Maeda MY; Montis D; Gontijo R; Sarian LO; Syrjänen K Acta Cytol; 2007; 51(6):872-81. PubMed ID: 18077979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A quality control system involving peer review of abnormal cervical smears. Palli D; Confortini M; Biggeri A; Russo A; Cariaggi P; Carozzi F; Minuti PA Cytopathology; 1993; 4(1):17-25. PubMed ID: 8453014 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Interlaboratory reproducibility of atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance: a national survey. Confortini M; Di Bonito L; Carozzi F; Ghiringhello B; Montanari G; Parisio F; Prandi S; Cytopathology; 2006 Dec; 17(6):353-60. PubMed ID: 17168918 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Effect of circulation and discussion of cervical smears on agreement between laboratories. Ronco G; Montanari G; Confortini M; Parisio F; Berardengo E; Delpiano AM; Arnaud S; Campione D; Baldini D; Poll P; Lynge E; Mancini E; Segnan N Cytopathology; 2003 Jun; 14(3):115-20. PubMed ID: 12828719 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Development of a Pap smear quality-assurance system in family practice. Curtis P; Varenholt JJ; Skinner B; Addison L; Resnick J; Kebede M Fam Med; 1993 Feb; 25(2):135-9. PubMed ID: 8458544 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control in a cervical screening programme. Tavares SB; de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG Cytopathology; 2008 Aug; 19(4):254-9. PubMed ID: 18476988 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessment of specimen adequacy reproducibility: an Italian experience. Montanari G; Confortini M; Bellomi A; Cocchi V; Dalla Palma P; D'Ambrosio E; Giovagnoli MR; Navone R; Ronco G; Diagn Cytopathol; 2003 Apr; 28(4):224-6. PubMed ID: 12672101 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Influence of smear quality on the rate of detecting significant cervical cytologic abnormalities. Henry JA; Wadehra V Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(3):529-35. PubMed ID: 8669190 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The use of digital images to evaluate the interobserver agreement on cervical smear readings in Italian cervical cancer screening. Tinacci G; Biggeri A; Pellegrini A; Cariaggi MP; Schiboni ML; Confortini M Cytopathology; 2011 Apr; 22(2):75-81. PubMed ID: 20482719 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Cause and follow-up of inadequate cervical smears in the county of Funen]. Dahl MB; Ejersbo D; Hølund B Ugeskr Laeger; 2002 Sep; 164(37):4280-3. PubMed ID: 12362869 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Consistency of cytology diagnosis for cervical cancer between two laboratories. Sriamporn S; Kritpetcharat O; Nieminen P; Suwanrungraung K; Kamsa-ard S; Parkin DM Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2005; 6(2):208-12. PubMed ID: 16101335 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]