119 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]
