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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9250299)

  • 21. PAPNET for cervical cytology screening. Experience in Greece.
    Veneti S; Papaefthimiou M; Symiakaki H; Ioannidou-Mouzaka L
    Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 9987447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Automated screening for quality control using PAPNET: a study of 638 negative Pap smears.
    Keyhani-Rofagha S; Palma T; O'Toole RV
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1996 Jun; 14(4):316-20. PubMed ID: 8725131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Negative cervical smears before CIN 3/carcinoma. Reevaluation with the PAPNET Testing System.
    Doornewaard H; van de Seijp H; Woudt JM; van der Graaf Y; van den Tweel JG
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):74-8. PubMed ID: 9022729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Cost analysis of PAPNET-assisted vs. conventional Pap smear evaluation in primary screening of cervical smears.
    Meerding WJ; Doornewaard H; van Ballegooijen M; Bos A; van der Graaf Y; van den Tweel JG; van der Schouw YT; Habbema JD
    Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 11213501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparison of Papnet-assisted and manual screening of cervical smears.
    Losell K; Dejmek A
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1999 Oct; 21(4):296-9. PubMed ID: 10495327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of PAPNET testing as an ancillary tool to clarify the status of the "atypical" cervical smear.
    Sherman ME; Schiffman MH; Mango LJ; Kelly D; Acosta D; Cason Z; Elgert P; Zaleski S; Scott DR; Kurman RJ; Stoler M; Lorincz AT
    Mod Pathol; 1997 Jun; 10(6):564-71. PubMed ID: 9195573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Papnet-assisted, primary screening of cervico-vaginal smears.
    Duggan MA
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2000; 21(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 10726616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Rescreen effect in conventional and PAPNET screening: observed in a study using material enriched with positive smears.
    van Ballegooijen M; Beck S; Boon ME; Boer R; Habbema JD
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(5):1133-8. PubMed ID: 9755670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Consistency of a double PAPNET scan of cervical smears.
    Jenny J; Isenegger I; Boon ME; Husain OA
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):82-7. PubMed ID: 9022731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Automated sputum screening with PAPNET system: a study of 122 cases.
    Hoda RS; Saccomanno G; Schreiber K; Decker D; Koss LG
    Hum Pathol; 1996 Jul; 27(7):656-9. PubMed ID: 8698308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. PAPNET testing for HSILs. The few cell/small cell challenge.
    Solomon HM; Frist S
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):253-9. PubMed ID: 9479348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Detection of endocervical component by PAPNET system on negative cervical smears.
    Ashfaq R; Solares B; Saboorian MH
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1996 Aug; 15(2):121-3. PubMed ID: 8872433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Computer-assisted primary screening of cervical smears using the PAPNET method: comparison with conventional screening and evaluation of the role of the cytologist.
    Ouwerkerk-Noordam E; Boon ME; Beck S
    Cytopathology; 1994 Aug; 5(4):211-8. PubMed ID: 7948757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Prospective study of PAPNET: review of 25,656 Pap smears negative on manual screening and rapid rescreening.
    Halford JA; Wright RG; Ditchmen EJ
    Cytopathology; 1999 Oct; 10(5):317-23. PubMed ID: 10588350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Multicenter comparison of manual and automated screening of AutoCyte gynecologic preparations.
    Bishop JW; Kaufman RH; Taylor DA
    Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):34-8. PubMed ID: 9987448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Performance of a semiautomated Papanicolaou smear screening system: results of a population-based study conducted in Guanacaste, Costa Rica.
    Sherman ME; Schiffman M; Herrero R; Kelly D; Bratti C; Mango LJ; Alfaro M; Hutchinson ML; Mena F; Hildesheim A; Morales J; Greenberg MD; Balmaceda I; Lorincz AT
    Cancer; 1998 Oct; 84(5):273-80. PubMed ID: 9801201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The PAPNET system for quality control of cervical smears: validation and limits.
    Cenci M; Nagar C; Giovagnoli MR; Vecchione A
    Anticancer Res; 1997; 17(6D):4731-4. PubMed ID: 9494597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.