152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9932072)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
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. 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]
6. [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]
7. 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]
8. Evaluation of PAPNET system for rescreening of negative cervical smears.
Ashfaq R; Liang Y; Saboorian MH
Diagn Cytopathol; 1995 Jul; 13(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 7587873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Colposcopy for cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions found on Papanicolaou smear.
Reed BD
Arch Fam Med; 1996; 5(10):582-4. PubMed ID: 8930230
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Cost-effectiveness of the conventional papanicolaou test with a new adjunct to cytological screening for squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix and its precursors.
Taylor LA; Sorensen SV; Ray NF; Halpern MT; Harper DM
Arch Fam Med; 2000 Aug; 9(8):713-21. PubMed ID: 10927709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Cost-effectiveness of rescreening conventionally prepared cervical smears by PAPNET testing.
Schechter CB
Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(6):1272-82. PubMed ID: 8960040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cost analysis of PAPNET-assisted vs. conventional Pap smear evaluation in primary screening of cervical smears.
Meerding WJ; Doornewaard H; van Ballegooijen M; Bos A; van der Graaf Y; van den Tweel JG; van der Schouw YT; Habbema JD
Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 11213501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A cost-benefit analysis of colposcopy for cervical squamous intraepithelial lesions found on Papanicolaou smear.
Chesebro MJ; Everett WD
Arch Fam Med; 1996; 5(10):576-81. PubMed ID: 8930229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Prospective study of PAPNET: review of 25,656 Pap smears negative on manual screening and rapid rescreening.
Halford JA; Wright RG; Ditchmen EJ
Cytopathology; 1999 Oct; 10(5):317-23. PubMed ID: 10588350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. [Evaluation of PAPNET--a semiautomated system used in the screening against cervical cancer].
Hølund B; Ejersbo D; Hjortebjerg A
Ugeskr Laeger; 1998 Sep; 160(40):5802-6. PubMed ID: 9782761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
