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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9638377)

  • 1. Personal performance profiles: a useful adjunct to quality assurance in cervical cytology.
    Houliston DC; Boyd CM; Nicholas DS; Smith JA
    Cytopathology; 1998 Jun; 9(3):162-70. PubMed ID: 9638377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Comparison of cervical cytology reporting rates: a useful adjunct to external quality assurance.
    Butland D; Herbert A
    Cytopathology; 1996 Dec; 7(6):391-9. PubMed ID: 8958472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Cervical cytology external and internal quality assurance: a comparative appraisal.
    Slater DN
    J Clin Pathol; 1995 Feb; 48(2):95-7. PubMed ID: 7745128
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Personal performance profiles: a useful adjunct to quality assurance in cervical cytology.
    Heatley MK
    Cytopathology; 1999 Feb; 10(1):66. PubMed ID: 10068890
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 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. Internal quality assurance of sensitivity of primary screening.
    Boxer ME
    Cytopathology; 1998 Oct; 9(5):349-50. PubMed ID: 9800134
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. External quality assessment in gynaecological cytology: The Trent Region experience. The Trent Regional Gynaecological Pathology Quality Assurance Group for the National Health Service Cervical Screening Programme.
    Slater DN; Hewer EM; Melling SE; Rice S
    Cytopathology; 2002 Aug; 13(4):206-19. PubMed ID: 12269893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Rescreening in cervical cytology for quality control. When bad data is worse than no data or what works, what doesn't, and why.
    Renshaw AA
    Clin Lab Med; 2003 Sep; 23(3):695-708. PubMed ID: 14560535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting, and criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology. Second edition including revised performance indicators.
    Johnson EJ; Patnick J;
    Cytopathology; 2000 Aug; 11(4):212-41. PubMed ID: 10983723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Do proficiency test results correlate with the work performance of screeners who screen Papanicolaou smears?
    Keenlyside RA; Collins CL; Hancock JS; Gagnon MC; Cohn RD; Menoff AL; Dodd LG; Kurtycz DF; Hearn TL; Baker EL
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1999 Dec; 112(6):769-76. PubMed ID: 10587699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of proficiency testing as a method of assessing competence to screen cervical smears.
    Gifford C; Green J; Coleman DV
    Cytopathology; 1997 Apr; 8(2):96-102. PubMed ID: 9134334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Weekly rescreening of 10% of the total cervical Papanicolaou smears: a worthwhile quality assurance scheme.
    Sampatanukul P; Wannakrairot P; Promprakob U; Yodavudh S; Anansiriprapa C
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2004 Sep; 87 Suppl 2():S261-5. PubMed ID: 16083199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. [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]  

  • 20. Quality assurance in gynecologic cytology. The value of cytotechnologist-cytopathologist discrepancy logs.
    Cibas ES; Dean B; Maffeo N; Allred EN
    Am J Clin Pathol; 2001 Apr; 115(4):512-6. PubMed ID: 11293898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.