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

228 related items for PubMed ID: 3521176

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Diagnostic accuracy of squamous cervical lesions studied in spatula-cytobrush smears.
    Alons-van Kordelaar JJ, Boon ME.
    Acta Cytol; 1988; 32(6):801-4. PubMed ID: 3059733
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Comparison of spatula and nonspatula methods for cervical sampling.
    Rammou-Kinia R, Anagnostopoulou I, Gomousa M.
    Acta Cytol; 1991; 35(1):69-75. PubMed ID: 1994638
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. The Cell-Sweep. A new cervical cytology sampling device.
    Tyau L, Hernandez E, Anderson L, Heller P, Edmonds P.
    J Reprod Med; 1994 Nov; 39(11):899-902. PubMed ID: 7853282
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. The cytobrush for evaluating routine cervicovaginal-endocervical smears.
    Lai-Goldman M, Nieberg RK, Mulcahy D, Wiesmeier E.
    J Reprod Med; 1990 Oct; 35(10):959-63. PubMed ID: 2246763
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 10. Exploiting the "toothpick effect" of the Cytobrush by plastic embedding of cervical samples.
    Boon ME, Zeppa P, Ouwerkerk-Noordam E, Kok LP.
    Acta Cytol; 1991 Oct; 35(1):57-63. PubMed ID: 1994636
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Controlled evaluation of implementing the Cytobrush technique to improve Papanicolaou smear quality.
    Murata PJ, Johnson RA, McNicoll KE.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1990 Apr; 75(4):690-5. PubMed ID: 2314788
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Cervical smears following laser treatment. Comparison of Cervex brush versus Cytobrush-Ayre spatula sampling.
    Szarewski A, Cuzick J, Singer A.
    Acta Cytol; 1991 Apr; 35(1):76-8. PubMed ID: 1994639
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Paired cervical smears: a method of reducing the false-negative rate in population screening.
    Beilby JO, Bourne R, Guillebaud J, Steele ST.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1982 Jul; 60(1):46-8. PubMed ID: 7088450
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Cervical cytology with the Papette sampler.
    Ferenczy A, Robitaille J, Guralnick M, Shatz R.
    J Reprod Med; 1994 Apr; 39(4):304-10. PubMed ID: 8040849
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. The effectiveness and safety of two cervical cytologic techniques during pregnancy.
    Stillson T, Knight AL, Elswick RK.
    J Fam Pract; 1997 Aug; 45(2):159-63. PubMed ID: 9267375
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Cervex-Brush and Cytobrush. Comparison of their ability to sample abnormal cells for cervical smears.
    Hutchinson M, Fertitta L, Goldbaum B, Hamza M, Vanerian S, Isenstein L.
    J Reprod Med; 1991 Aug; 36(8):581-6. PubMed ID: 1941800
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. [Sampling devices for the Papanicolaou test].
    Broso P, Buffetti G, Sacco A.
    Minerva Ginecol; 1992 Sep; 44(9):441-7. PubMed ID: 1436619
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 12.