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 *

121 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9755670)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Negative cervical smears before CIN 3/carcinoma. Reevaluation with the PAPNET Testing System.
    Doornewaard H; van de Seijp H; Woudt JM; van der Graaf Y; van den Tweel JG
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):74-8. PubMed ID: 9022729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. New paradigm for ASCUS diagnosis using neural networks.
    Kok MR; Habers MA; Schreiner-Kok PG; Boon ME
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1998 Nov; 19(5):361-6. PubMed ID: 9812231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Observer variation in cytologic grading for cervical dysplasia of Papanicolaou smears with the PAPNET testing system.
    Doornewaard H; van der Schouw YT; van der Graaf Y; Bos AB; van den Tweel JG
    Cancer; 1999 Aug; 87(4):178-83. PubMed ID: 10455204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. PAPNET testing for HSILs. The few cell/small cell challenge.
    Solomon HM; Frist S
    Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):253-9. PubMed ID: 9479348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [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]  

  • 15. ASCUS on cervical cytologic smears. Clinical significance.
    Yang M; Zachariah S
    J Reprod Med; 1997 Jun; 42(6):329-31. PubMed ID: 9219118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Consistency of a double PAPNET scan of cervical smears.
    Jenny J; Isenegger I; Boon ME; Husain OA
    Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):82-7. PubMed ID: 9022731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.