246 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9438746)
1. PAPNET-assisted rescreening of cervical smears: cost and accuracy compared with a 100% manual rescreening strategy.
O'Leary TJ; Tellado M; Buckner SB; Ali IS; Stevens A; Ollayos CW
JAMA; 1998 Jan; 279(3):235-7. PubMed ID: 9438746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Costs and outcomes of PAPNET secondary screening technology for cervical cytologic evaluation. A community hospital's experience.
Brotzman GL; Kretzchmar S; Ferguson D; Gottlieb M; Stowe C
Arch Fam Med; 1999; 8(1):52-5. PubMed ID: 9932072
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of the PAPNET cytologic screening system for quality control of cervical smears.
Koss LG; Lin E; Schreiber K; Elgert P; Mango L
Am J Clin Pathol; 1994 Feb; 101(2):220-9. PubMed ID: 8116579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of the PAPNET system in a general pathology service.
Farnsworth A; Chambers FM; Goldschmidt CS
Med J Aust; 1996 Oct; 165(8):429-31. PubMed ID: 8913244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of PAPNET system for rescreening of negative cervical smears.
Ashfaq R; Liang Y; Saboorian MH
Diagn Cytopathol; 1995 Jul; 13(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 7587873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: a comparative review of original and automated rescreen diagnosis of cervicovaginal smears with long term follow-up.
Stastny JF; Remmers RE; London WB; Pedigo MA; Cahill LA; Ryan M; Frable WJ
Cancer; 1997 Dec; 81(6):348-53. PubMed ID: 9438460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Significant reduction in the rate of false-negative cervical smears with neural network-based technology (PAPNET Testing System).
Koss LG; Sherman ME; Cohen MB; Anes AR; Darragh TM; Lemos LB; McClellan BJ; Rosenthal DL; Keyhani-Rofagha S; Schreiber K; Valente PT
Hum Pathol; 1997 Oct; 28(10):1196-203. PubMed ID: 9343327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Rescreening of atypical cervicovaginal smears using PAPNET.
Lerma E; Colomo L; Carreras A; Esteva E; Quilez M; Prat J
Cancer; 1998 Dec; 84(6):361-5. PubMed ID: 9915138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quality control of cervical cytology in high-risk women. PAPNET system compared with manual rescreening.
Bergeron C; Masseroli M; Ghezi A; Lemarie A; Mango L; Koss LG
Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(2):151-7. PubMed ID: 10740599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. PAPNET-directed rescreening of cervicovaginal smears: a study of 101 cases of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance.
Ryan MR; Stastny JF; Remmers R; Pedigo MA; Cahill LA; Frable WJ
Am J Clin Pathol; 1996 Jun; 105(6):711-8. PubMed ID: 8659445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Computer-assisted rescreening of clinically important false negative cervical smears using the PAPNET Testing System.
Rosenthal DL; Acosta D; Peters RK
Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(1):120-6. PubMed ID: 8604564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Improved quality-control detection of false-negative Pap smears using the Autopap 300 QC system.
Marshall CJ; Rowe L; Bentz JS
Diagn Cytopathol; 1999 Mar; 20(3):170-4. PubMed ID: 10086244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Neural-network-assisted analysis and microscopic rescreening in presumed negative cervical cytologic smears. A comparison.
Mango LJ; Valente PT
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):227-32. PubMed ID: 9479345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. PAPNET analysis of reportedly negative smears preceding the diagnosis of a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or carcinoma.
Sherman ME; Mango LJ; Kelly D; Paull G; Ludin V; Copeland C; Solomon D; Schiffman MH
Mod Pathol; 1994 Jun; 7(5):578-81. PubMed ID: 7937724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. [The PAPNET system in the rescreening of negative cervical/vaginal smears. A study from the Imola cytology laboratory].
Ghidoni D; Fabbris E; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Medri M; Bucchi L; Bondi A
Pathologica; 1998 Aug; 90(4):357-63. PubMed ID: 9793395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
