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.
111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9987446)
1. Performance of the AutoPap primary screening system at Jefferson University Hospital. Bibbo M; Hawthorne C Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):27-9. PubMed ID: 9987446 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Does use of the AutoPap assisted primary screener improve cytologic diagnosis? Bibbo M; Hawthorne C; Zimmerman B Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 9987445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A feasibility study of the AutoPap system location-guided screening. Lee JS; Kuan L; Oh S; Patten FW; Wilbur DC Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):221-6. PubMed ID: 9479344 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The AutoPap system for primary screening in cervical cytology. Comparing the results of a prospective, intended-use study with routine manual practice. Wilbur DC; Prey MU; Miller WM; Pawlick GF; Colgan TJ Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):214-20. PubMed ID: 9479343 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Multicenter comparison of manual and automated screening of AutoCyte gynecologic preparations. Bishop JW; Kaufman RH; Taylor DA Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):34-8. PubMed ID: 9987448 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Use of automated primary screening on liquid-based, thin-layer preparations. Vassilakos P; Carrel S; Petignat P; Boulvain M; Campana A Acta Cytol; 2002; 46(2):291-5. PubMed ID: 11917575 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The AutoPap 300 QC System multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears: II. Prospective and archival sensitivity studies. Patten SF; Lee JS; Wilbur DC; Bonfiglio TA; Colgan TJ; Richart RM; Cramer H; Moinuddin S Cancer; 1997 Dec; 81(6):343-7. PubMed ID: 9438459 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The AutoPap 300 QC System multicenter clinical trials for use in quality control rescreening of cervical smears: I. A prospective intended use study. Patten SF; Lee JS; Wilbur DC; Bonfiglio TA; Colgan TJ; Richart RM; Cramer H; Moinuddin S Cancer; 1997 Dec; 81(6):337-42. PubMed ID: 9438458 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. AutoCyte Interactive Screening System. Experience at a university hospital cytology laboratory. Howell LP; Belk T; Agdigos R; Davis R; Lowe J Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):58-64. PubMed ID: 9987451 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. PAPNET for cervical cytology screening. Experience in Greece. Veneti S; Papaefthimiou M; Symiakaki H; Ioannidou-Mouzaka L Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):30-3. PubMed ID: 9987447 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. AutoPap 300 QC system scoring of cervical smears without "epithelial cell abnormalities". Colgan TJ; Bon N; Lee JS; Patten SF Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 9022725 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Determining the utility and effectiveness of the NeoPath AutoPap 300 QC System used routinely. Fetterman B; Pawlick G; Koo H; Hartinger J; Gilbert C; Connell S Acta Cytol; 1999; 43(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 9987444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Improved quality-control detection of false-negative Pap smears using the Autopap 300 QC system. Marshall CJ; Rowe L; Bentz JS Diagn Cytopathol; 1999 Mar; 20(3):170-4. PubMed ID: 10086244 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. A retrospective validation of the FocalPoint GS slide profiler NFR technology by analysis of interval disease outcomes compared with manual cytology. Nuttall DS; Hillier S; Clayton HR; Savage AJ; Martin CM; O'Leary JJ Cancer Cytopathol; 2019 Apr; 127(4):240-246. PubMed ID: 30825407 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Accuracy of a slide profiler for endocervical cell detection in no-further-review conventional Pap smears. Rowe LR; Marshall CJ; Berry M; Larson MA; Bentz JS Acta Cytol; 2003; 47(4):602-4. PubMed ID: 12920753 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]