157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9987445)
21. 100% rapid rescreening for quality assurance in a quality control program in a public health cytologic laboratory.
Mattosinho de Castro Ferraz Mda G; Dall' Agnol M; di Loreto C; Pirani WM; Utagawa ML; Pereira SM; Sakai YI; Feres CL; Shih LW; Yamamoto LS; Rodrigues RO; Shirata NK; Longatta Filho A
Acta Cytol; 2005; 49(6):639-43. PubMed ID: 16450904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Impact of the AutoPap (currently Focalpoint) primary screening system location guide use on interpretation time and diagnosis.
Ronco G; Vineis C; Montanari G; Orlassino R; Parisio F; Arnaud S; Berardengo E; Fabbrini T; Segnan N
Cancer; 2003 Apr; 99(2):83-8. PubMed ID: 12704687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The primary screening clinical trials of the TriPath AutoPap System.
Wilbur DC; Norton MK
Epidemiology; 2002 May; 13 Suppl 3():S30-3. PubMed ID: 12071481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Sensitivity studies of AutoPap System Location-Guided Screening of cervical-vaginal cytologic smears.
Huang TW; Lin TS; Lee JS
Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(3):363-8. PubMed ID: 10349363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. A clinical trial of the AutoPap 300 QC system for quality control of cervicovaginal cytology in the clinical laboratory.
Colgan TJ; Patten SF; Lee JS
Acta Cytol; 1995; 39(6):1191-8. PubMed ID: 7483997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Endometrial cells and the AutoPap System for primary screening of cervicovaginal Pap smears.
Walts AE; Thomas P
Diagn Cytopathol; 2002 Oct; 27(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 12357502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. [The use of a computerised system in the reading of cytological cervicovaginals smears during programming of regional screening (one year of experience using the autopap system)].
Orlassino R; Fabbrini T; Gallo C; Vineis C
Pathologica; 2005 Apr; 97(2):78-83. PubMed ID: 16032952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. FocalPoint slide classification algorithms show robust performance in classification of high-grade lesions on SurePath liquid-based cervical cytology slides.
Parker EM; Foti JA; Wilbur DC
Diagn Cytopathol; 2004 Feb; 30(2):107-10. PubMed ID: 14755762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Automated cervical cytology: meta-analyses of the performance of the AutoPap 300 QC System.
Abulafia O; Sherer DM
Obstet Gynecol Surv; 1999 Jul; 54(7):469-76. PubMed ID: 10394585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Papnet-assisted cytological diagnosis intensifies the already marked variability among cytological laboratories.
Mudu P; Migliore G; Alderisio M; Morosini P; Douglas G; Navone R; Montanari G; Di Bonito L; Vitali A; Moretti D; Giovagnoli MR; Fulciniti F; Branca M;
Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2002; 23(3):211-5. PubMed ID: 12094957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Enhancing the performance of the AutoPap 300 QC system with optimal staining and presentation of cervical smears.
Colgan TJ; Smith J; Patten SF; Lee JS
Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):50-5. PubMed ID: 9022726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Sensitivity of the AutoPap 300 QC System for cervical cytologic abnormalities. Biopsy data confirmation.
Wilbur DC; Bonfiglio TA; Rutkowski MA; Atkison KM; Richart RM; Lee JS; Patten SF
Acta Cytol; 1996; 40(1):127-32. PubMed ID: 8604565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Quality assurance in cervical smears: 100% rapid rescreening vs. 10% random rescreening.
Amaral RG; Zeferino LC; Hardy E; Westin MC; Martinez EZ; Montemor EB
Acta Cytol; 2005; 49(3):244-8. PubMed ID: 15966284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. A feasibility study of the use of the AutoPap screening system as a primary screening and location-guided rescreening device.
Confortini M; Bonardi L; Bulgaresi P; Cariaggi MP; Cecchini S; Ciatto S; Cipparrone I; Galanti L; Maddau C; Matucci M; Rubeca T; Troni GM; Turco P; Zappa M; Carozzi F
Cancer; 2003 Jun; 99(3):129-34. PubMed ID: 12811852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. 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]
37. Clinical Significance of a cervical cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Favoring a reactive process or low grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
Gonzalez D; Hernandez E; Anderson L; Heller P; Atkinson BF
J Reprod Med; 1996 Oct; 41(10):719-23. PubMed ID: 9026557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Rapid prescreening of Papanicolaou smears: a practical and efficient quality control strategy.
Djemli A; Khetani K; Auger M
Cancer; 2006 Feb; 108(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 16302251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. AutoPap system performance in screening for low prevalence and small cell abnormalities.
Lee JS; Wilhelm P; Kuan L; Ellison DG; Lei X; Oh S; Patten SF
Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):56-64. PubMed ID: 9022727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Reproducibility of telecytology diagnosis of cervical smears in a quality assurance program: the Georgian experience.
Kldiashvili E; Schrader T
Telemed J E Health; 2011 Sep; 17(7):565-8. PubMed ID: 21851161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
