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.
64 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9041744)
1. Diagnostic reproducibility of Pap testing in two regions of Mexico: the need for quality control mechanisms. de Ruíz PA; Lazcano Ponce EC; Duarte Torres R; Ruíz Juárez I; Martínez Cortez I Bull Pan Am Health Organ; 1996 Dec; 30(4):330-8. PubMed ID: 9041744 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Diagnostic concordance in gynecologic cytology]. Lazcano Ponce EC; de Ruiz PA; Martínez Arias C; Murguía Riechers L Rev Invest Clin; 1997; 49(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 9380963 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of the cervical cytology test using the PAPNET method and conventional microscopy. Weissbrod D; Torres M; Rodríguez A; Ureña I; Estrada J; Reyes ME; Carreto AJ Bull Pan Am Health Organ; 1996 Dec; 30(4):339-47. PubMed ID: 9041745 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [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]
5. Reproducibility study of cervical cytopathology in Mexico: a need for regulation and professional accreditation. Lazcano-Ponce EC; Alonso de Ruiz P; Martinez-Arias C; Murguia-Riechers L Diagn Cytopathol; 1997 Jul; 17(1):20-4. PubMed ID: 9218898 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Glandular cell atypia on Papanicolaou smears: interobserver variability in the diagnosis and prediction of cell of origin. Simsir A; Hwang S; Cangiarella J; Elgert P; Levine P; Sheffield MV; Roberson J; Talley L; Chhieng DC Cancer; 2003 Dec; 99(6):323-30. PubMed ID: 14681938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Reproducibility of cytologic diagnosis: study of CRISAP Ile-de-France]. Barrès D; Bergeron C Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2000 Feb; 28(2):120-6. PubMed ID: 10758586 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Interobserver variability in cytologic subclassification of squamous intraepithelial lesions--the Bethesda System vs. World Health Organization classification. Pajtler M; Audy-Jurković S; Milicić-Juhas V; Staklenac B; Pauzar B Coll Antropol; 2006 Mar; 30(1):137-42. PubMed ID: 16617588 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Histopathological verification of the cervical pap smears based on material of the obstetrical-gynecological department of the provincial hospital in Kielce]. Starzewski J; Góźdź S; Polak G; Piasek G; Laskawska M; Anisiewicz A; Adamczyk K Wiad Lek; 1999; 52(3-4):158-63. PubMed ID: 10499026 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Severe cervical glandular cell lesions with coexisting squamous cell lesions. van Aspert-van Erp AJ; Smedts FM; Vooijs GP Cancer; 2004 Aug; 102(4):218-27. PubMed ID: 15368313 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risk of invasive cervical cancer after three consecutive negative Pap smears. Coldman A; Phillips N; Kan L; Matisic J; Benedet L; Towers L J Med Screen; 2003; 10(4):196-200. PubMed ID: 14738657 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Severe cervical glandular cell lesions and severe cervical combined lesions: predictive value of the papanicolaou smear. van Aspert-van Erp AJ; Smedts FM; Vooijs GP Cancer; 2004 Aug; 102(4):210-7. PubMed ID: 15368312 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Telecytology: intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of cervical-vaginal smears. Alli PM; Ollayos CW; Thompson LD; Kapadia I; Butler DR; Williams BH; Rosenthal DL; O'leary TJ Hum Pathol; 2001 Dec; 32(12):1318-22. PubMed ID: 11774163 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The pap-smear history of women with invasive cervical squamous carcinoma. A case-control study from Sweden. Andersson-Ellström A; Seidal T; Grannas M; Hagmar B Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2000 Mar; 79(3):221-6. PubMed ID: 10716304 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [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]
16. The effect of the quality of Papanicolaou smears on the detection of cytologic abnormalities. Mintzer M; Curtis P; Resnick JC; Morrell D Cancer; 1999 Jun; 87(3):113-7. PubMed ID: 10385441 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [An operative model: verification of the quality of the screening Pap test ]. Montanari GR; Arnaud S; Berardengo E; Campione D; Cozzani C; Parisio F; Viberti L; Ghiringhello B Pathologica; 2001 Oct; 93(5):609-10. PubMed ID: 11725370 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of cervical smears. Kashyap V; Murthy NS; Bhatnagar P; Sharma S; Das DK Indian J Pathol Microbiol; 1995 Oct; 38(4):375-82. PubMed ID: 9726147 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cytohistologic correlation rates between conventional Papanicolaou smears and ThinPrep cervical cytology: a comparison. Chacho MS; Mattie ME; Schwartz PE Cancer; 2003 Jun; 99(3):135-40. PubMed ID: 12811853 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [False negative Pap smears in a Danish material]. Ejersbo D; Dahl MB; Hølund B Ugeskr Laeger; 2003 Jun; 165(23):2391-4. PubMed ID: 12840998 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]