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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

132 related items for PubMed ID: 10484869

  • 1. [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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. [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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Detection of unsuspected abnormalities by PAPNET-assisted review.
    Mitchell H, Medley G.
    Acta Cytol; 1998 Nov; 42(1):260-4. PubMed ID: 9479349
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 6. 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 Nov; 41(1):74-8. PubMed ID: 9022729
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of the cervical cytology test using the PAPNET method and conventional microscopy.
    Weissbrod D, Torres M, Rodríguez A, Ureña I, Estrada J, Reyes ME, Carreto AJ.
    Bull Pan Am Health Organ; 1996 Dec; 30(4):339-47. PubMed ID: 9041745
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. [Analysis of the intralaboratory diagnostic variability in the Imola cervical screening program].
    Fabbris E, Bucchi L, Folicaldi S, Amadori A, Ghidoni D, Medri M, Bondi A.
    Pathologica; 1998 Apr; 90(2):127-32. PubMed ID: 9619055
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. 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
    [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 Jun; 42(1):227-32. PubMed ID: 9479345
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. 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 Jun; 8(1):52-5. PubMed ID: 9932072
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Potentially difficult smears of women with squamous cell carcinoma pose fewer problems when PAPNET is used for primary screening.
    Kok MR, Schreiner-Kok PG, Van Der Veen G, Boon ME.
    Cytopathology; 1999 Oct; 10(5):324-34. PubMed ID: 10588351
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Evaluation of the PAPNET system in a general pathology service.
    Farnsworth A, Chambers FM, Goldschmidt CS.
    Med J Aust; 1996 Oct 21; 165(8):429-31. PubMed ID: 8913244
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Consistency of a double PAPNET scan of cervical smears.
    Jenny J, Isenegger I, Boon ME, Husain OA.
    Acta Cytol; 1997 Oct 21; 41(1):82-7. PubMed ID: 9022731
    [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 20; 103(3):422-6. PubMed ID: 12471627
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. The PAPNET system for quality control of cervical smears: validation and limits.
    Cenci M, Nagar C, Giovagnoli MR, Vecchione A.
    Anticancer Res; 1997 Jan 20; 17(6D):4731-4. PubMed ID: 9494597
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. 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 25; 81(6):343-7. PubMed ID: 9438459
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Evaluation of PAPNET testing as an ancillary tool to clarify the status of the "atypical" cervical smear.
    Sherman ME, Schiffman MH, Mango LJ, Kelly D, Acosta D, Cason Z, Elgert P, Zaleski S, Scott DR, Kurman RJ, Stoler M, Lorincz AT.
    Mod Pathol; 1997 Jun 25; 10(6):564-71. PubMed ID: 9195573
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 7.