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 *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9557269)

  • 41. [An interlaboratory study of the use of PapNet in the quality control of cervico-vaginal cytology].
    Cosentino A; Ghidoni D; Salemi M; Folicaldi S; Amadori A; Zani J; Grasso G; Bondi A
    Pathologica; 1999 Apr; 91(2):101-6. PubMed ID: 10484869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. 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]  

  • 43. 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]  

  • 44. Rescreening of cervical Papanicolaou smears using PAPNET.
    Greenberg MD
    JAMA; 1998 Jun; 279(22):1785-6; author reply 1787-8. PubMed ID: 9628705
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. 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]  

  • 46. Clinical validation of interactive cytologic screening. Automating the search, not the interpretation.
    Mango LJ
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):93-7. PubMed ID: 9022733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. 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]  

  • 48. Potentially difficult smears of women with squamous cell carcinoma pose fewer problems when PAPNET is used for primary screening.
    Kok MR; Schreiner-Kok PG; Van Der Veen G; Boon ME
    Cytopathology; 1999 Oct; 10(5):324-34. PubMed ID: 10588351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Neural network processing can provide means to catch errors that slip through human screening of pap smears.
    Boon ME; Kok LP
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1993 Aug; 9(4):411-6. PubMed ID: 8261846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Consequences of neural network technology for cervical screening: increase in diagnostic consistency and positive scores.
    Kok MR; Boon ME
    Cancer; 1996 Jul; 78(1):112-7. PubMed ID: 8646706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Automated cervical cytology: meta-analyses of the performance of the PAPNET system.
    Abulafia O; Sherer DM
    Obstet Gynecol Surv; 1999 Apr; 54(4):253-64. PubMed ID: 10198930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Reproducibility in double scanning of cervical smears with the PAPNET system.
    Doornewaard H; van der Schouw YT; van der Graaf Y
    Acta Cytol; 2000; 44(4):604-10. PubMed ID: 10934954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. 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]  

  • 54. Prospective and randomised public-health trial on neural network-assisted screening for cervical cancer in Finland: results of the first year.
    Nieminen P; Hakama M; Viikki M; Tarkkanen J; Anttila A
    Int J Cancer; 2003 Jan; 103(3):422-6. PubMed ID: 12471627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Detection of laboratory false negative smears by the PAPNET cytologic screening system.
    Mitchell H; Medley G
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):265-70. PubMed ID: 9479350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. 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]  

  • 57. 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]  

  • 58. Efficiency of PAPNET in detecting infectious organisms in cervicovaginal smears.
    Ashfaq R; Thomas S; Saboorian MH
    Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(5):885-8. PubMed ID: 8842161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Neural network processing of cervical smears can lead to a decrease in diagnostic variability and an increase in screening efficacy: a study of 63 false-negative smears.
    Boon ME; Kok LP; Nygaard-Nielsen M; Holm K; Holund B
    Mod Pathol; 1994 Dec; 7(9):957-61. PubMed ID: 7892166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Detection of unsuspected abnormalities by PAPNET-assisted review.
    Mitchell H; Medley G
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):260-4. PubMed ID: 9479349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.