114 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]
