234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9793395)
21. Significant reduction in the rate of false-negative cervical smears with neural network-based technology (PAPNET Testing System).
Koss LG; Sherman ME; Cohen MB; Anes AR; Darragh TM; Lemos LB; McClellan BJ; Rosenthal DL; Keyhani-Rofagha S; Schreiber K; Valente PT
Hum Pathol; 1997 Oct; 28(10):1196-203. PubMed ID: 9343327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Results of AutoPap system-assisted and manual cytologic screening. A comparison.
Wertlake P
J Reprod Med; 1999 Jan; 44(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 9987733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Rapid prescreen of cervical liquid-based cytology preparations: results of a study in an academic medical center.
Frable WJ; Pedigo MA; Powers CN; Yarrell C; Ortiz B; Clark ME; Ebron T
Diagn Cytopathol; 2012 Aug; 40(8):691-7. PubMed ID: 22807384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. Quality assurance in cervical cytology screening. Comparison of rapid rescreening and the PAPNET Testing System.
Halford JA; Wright RG; Ditchmen EJ
Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):79-81. PubMed ID: 9022730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. 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]
29. 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]
30. 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]
31. Assessment of automated primary screening on PAPNET of cervical smears in the PRISMATIC trial. PRISMATIC Project Management Team.
Lancet; 1999 Apr; 353(9162):1381-5. PubMed ID: 10227217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Rescreening in gynecologic cytology. Rescreening of 3762 previous cases for current high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions and carcinoma--a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 312 institutions.
Jones BA
Arch Pathol Lab Med; 1995 Dec; 119(12):1097-103. PubMed ID: 7503656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Evaluation of PAPNET-assisted cervical rescreening.
Doornewaard H; Woudt JM; Strubbe P; van de Seijp H; van den Tweel JG
Cytopathology; 1997 Oct; 8(5):313-21. PubMed ID: 9313983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. 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]
35. Rapid pre-screening of cervical smears as a method of internal quality control in a cervical screening programme.
Tavares SB; de Sousa NL; Manrique EJ; de Albuquerque ZB; Zeferino LC; Amaral RG
Cytopathology; 2008 Aug; 19(4):254-9. PubMed ID: 18476988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. One hundred percent thorough quality control rescreening of liquid-based monolayers in cervicovaginal cytopathology.
Rowe LR; Marshall CJ; Bentz JS
Cancer; 2002 Dec; 96(6):325-9. PubMed ID: 12478679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. PAPNET computer-aided rescreening for detection of benign and malignant glandular elements in cervicovaginal smears: a review of 61 cases.
Sturgis CD; Isoe C; McNeal NE; Yu GH; DeFrias DV
Diagn Cytopathol; 1998 Apr; 18(4):307-11. PubMed ID: 9557269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. 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]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
