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 *

101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9577734)

  • 1. The sensitivity of rapid (partial) review of cervical smears.
    Shield PW; Cox NC
    Cytopathology; 1998 Apr; 9(2):84-92. PubMed ID: 9577734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Rapid review.
    Faraker CA
    Cytopathology; 1998 Apr; 9(2):71-6. PubMed ID: 9660635
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sensitivity of primary screening by rapid review: 'to act or not to act on the results, that is the question'.
    Slater DN
    Cytopathology; 1998 Apr; 9(2):77-83. PubMed ID: 9577733
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Improvement in the routine screening of cervical smears: A study using rapid prescreening and 100% rapid review as internal quality control methods.
    Tavares SB; Alves de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; Pinheiro de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
    Cancer Cytopathol; 2011 Dec; 119(6):367-76. PubMed ID: 21954191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Rapid screening: a comparative study.
    Dudding N; Hewer EM; Lancucki L; Rice S
    Cytopathology; 2001 Aug; 12(4):235-48. PubMed ID: 11488872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rapid screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control. For how long should we rescreen?
    Farrell DJ; Bilkhu S; Gibson LM; Cummings L; Wadehra V
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(2):251-60. PubMed ID: 9100751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Partial rescreening of all negative smears: an improved method of quality assurance in laboratories undertaking cervical screening.
    Faraker CA
    Cytopathology; 1993; 4(1):47-50. PubMed ID: 8453016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Rapid pre-screening: a validated quality assurance measure in cervical cytology.
    Smith J; Nicholas D; Boyd K; Deacon-Smith R
    Cytopathology; 2003 Oct; 14(5):275-80. PubMed ID: 14510892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Rapid (partial) prescreening of cervical smears: the quality control method of choice?
    Brooke D; Dudding N; Sutton J
    Cytopathology; 2002 Aug; 13(4):191-9. PubMed ID: 12269891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Estimating the sensitivity of cervical cytology: errors of interpretation and test limitations.
    Ronco G; Montanari G; Aimone V; Parisio F; Segnan N; Valle A; Volante R
    Cytopathology; 1996 Jun; 7(3):151-8. PubMed ID: 8782987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Rapid review of liquid-based smears as a quality control measure.
    Henderson S; Stevens M; Walker T
    Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Sep; 31(3):141-6. PubMed ID: 15349981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Value of repeat cytology at the time of colposcopy for the evaluation of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia on Papanicolaou smears.
    Wheelock JB; Kaminski PF
    J Reprod Med; 1989 Oct; 34(10):815-7. PubMed ID: 2795564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Medicolegal affairs. International Academy of Cytology Task Force summary. Diagnostic Cytology Towards the 21st Century: An International Expert Conference and Tutorial.
    Frable WJ; Austin RM; Greening SE; Collins RJ; Hillman RL; Kobler TP; Koss LG; Mitchell H; Perey R; Rosenthal DL; Sidoti MS; Somrak TM
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):76-119; discussion 120-32. PubMed ID: 9479326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 100% rapid rescreening for quality assurance in a quality control program in a public health cytologic laboratory.
    Mattosinho de Castro Ferraz Mda G; Dall' Agnol M; di Loreto C; Pirani WM; Utagawa ML; Pereira SM; Sakai YI; Feres CL; Shih LW; Yamamoto LS; Rodrigues RO; Shirata NK; Longatta Filho A
    Acta Cytol; 2005; 49(6):639-43. PubMed ID: 16450904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of false negative rates between 100% rapid review and 10% random full rescreening as internal quality control methods in cervical cytology screening.
    Lee BC; Lam SY; Walker T
    Acta Cytol; 2009; 53(3):271-6. PubMed ID: 19534266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.