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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9302930)

  • 1. Receiver operating characteristic curves for analysis of the results of cervicovaginal smears. A useful quality improvement tool.
    Renshaw AA; Dean BR; Cibas ES
    Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1997 Sep; 121(9):968-75. PubMed ID: 9302930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Use of statistical analysis of cytologic interpretation to determine the causes of interobserver disagreement and in quality improvement.
    Renshaw AA; Lee KR; Granter SR
    Cancer; 1997 Aug; 81(4):212-9. PubMed ID: 9292736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The diagnostic value of computer-assisted primary cervical smear screening: a longitudinal cohort study.
    Doornewaard H; van der Schouw YT; van der Graaf Y; Bos AB; Habbema JD; van den Tweel JG
    Mod Pathol; 1999 Nov; 12(11):995-1000. PubMed ID: 10574595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Screening properties of questionnaires and laboratory tests for the detection of alcohol abuse or dependence in a general practice population.
    Aertgeerts B; Buntinx F; Ansoms S; Fevery J
    Br J Gen Pract; 2001 Mar; 51(464):206-17. PubMed ID: 11255902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of pap smears.
    Arbyn M; Schenck U; Ellison E; Hanselaar A
    Cancer; 2003 Feb; 99(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 12589640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [A methodology study on assessment of cancer screening test].
    Gao GF; Zhao FH; Wu YP; Rong SD; Zhang WH; Pan QJ; Li L; Qiao YL
    Zhongguo Yi Xue Ke Xue Yuan Xue Bao; 2002 Dec; 24(6):573-6. PubMed ID: 12905682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Receiver operating characteristic analysis: a tool for the quantitative evaluation of observer performance and imaging systems.
    Metz CE
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Jun; 3(6):413-22. PubMed ID: 17412096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [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]  

  • 9. [Cervical smears taken by physicians' assistants are of lesser quality than smears taken by family physicians, but almost as good as the national average].
    Voordijk-van der Ben MH; Buntinx F
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jan; 144(2):74-7. PubMed ID: 10674106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Properties of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve for diagnostic test data.
    Walter SD
    Stat Med; 2002 May; 21(9):1237-56. PubMed ID: 12111876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [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]  

  • 12. Rapid prescreening of Papanicolaou smears: a practical and efficient quality control strategy.
    Djemli A; Khetani K; Auger M
    Cancer; 2006 Feb; 108(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 16302251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Comparison of monolayer specimens and conventional smears].
    Jensen ML; Fuursted PB; Svanholm H
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2001 Feb; 163(9):1270-5. PubMed ID: 11258251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Cervical cancer screening. False negative smears].
    Vassilakos P; De Marval F; Muñoz M
    Rev Med Suisse Romande; 1997 Aug; 117(8):597-601. PubMed ID: 9340714
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Evaluation of PAPNET--a semiautomated system used in the screening against cervical cancer].
    Hølund B; Ejersbo D; Hjortebjerg A
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1998 Sep; 160(40):5802-6. PubMed ID: 9782761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [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]  

  • 17. Comparison of visual inspection of cervix and Pap smear for cervical cancer screening.
    Tayyeb R; Khawaja NP; Malik N
    J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2003 Apr; 13(4):201-3. PubMed ID: 12718787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cervical cancer screening in a rural population of Zimbabwe.
    Thistle PJ; Chirenje ZM
    Cent Afr J Med; 1997 Sep; 43(9):246-51. PubMed ID: 9509642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The agreement chart as an alternative to the receiver-operating characteristic curve for diagnostic tests.
    Bangdiwala SI; Haedo AS; Natal ML; Villaveces A
    J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Sep; 61(9):866-74. PubMed ID: 18687288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.