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: 9022721
1. Comparison of the CytoRich system with conventional cervical cytology. Preliminary data on 2,032 cases from a clinical trial site. Bishop JW. Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):15-23. PubMed ID: 9022721 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical trials of the CytoRich specimen-preparation device for cervical cytology. Preliminary results. Wilbur DC, Facik MS, Rutkowski MA, Mulford DK, Atkison KM. Acta Cytol; 1997; 41(1):24-9. PubMed ID: 9022722 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Multicenter masked evaluation of AutoCyte PREP thin layers with matched conventional smears. Including initial biopsy results. Bishop JW, Bigner SH, Colgan TJ, Husain M, Howell LP, McIntosh KM, Taylor DA, Sadeghi MH. Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):189-97. PubMed ID: 9479339 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The AutoCyte preparation system for gynecologic cytology. Howell LP, Davis RL, Belk TI, Agdigos R, Lowe J. Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):171-7. PubMed ID: 9479336 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. AutoCyte Prep system vs. conventional cervical cytology. Comparison based on 2,156 cases. Minge L, Fleming M, VanGeem T, Bishop JW. J Reprod Med; 2000 Mar; 45(3):179-84. PubMed ID: 10756493 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. 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 Mar; 42(1):214-20. PubMed ID: 9479343 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Efficacy of monolayer preparations for cervical cytology: emphasis on suboptimal specimens. Vassilakos P, Cossali D, Albe X, Alonso L, Hohener R, Puget E. Acta Cytol; 1996 Mar; 40(3):496-500. PubMed ID: 8669185 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Liquid-based cervical-cell collection with brushes and wooden spatulas: a comparison of 100 conventional smears from high-risk women to liquid-fixed cytocentrifuge slides, demonstrating a cost-effective, alternative monolayer slide preparation method. Johnson T, Maksem JA, Belsheim BL, Roose EB, Klock LA, Eatwell L. Diagn Cytopathol; 2000 Feb; 22(2):86-91. PubMed ID: 10649517 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of thin-layer cytology in patients undergoing cervical cone biopsy. Bergeron C, Bishop J, Lemarie A, Cas F, Ayivi J, Huynh B, Barrasso R. Acta Cytol; 2001 Feb; 45(4):519-24. PubMed ID: 11480712 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Liquid-based cytology and conventional cervical smears: a comparison study in an Asian screening population. Cheung AN, Szeto EF, Leung BS, Khoo US, Ng AW. Cancer; 2003 Dec 25; 99(6):331-5. PubMed ID: 14681939 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. SpinThin, a simple, inexpensive technique for preparation of thin-layer cervical cytology from liquid-based specimens: data on 791 cases. Khalbuss WE, Rudomina D, Kauff ND, Chuang L, Melamed MR. Cancer; 2000 Jun 25; 90(3):135-42. PubMed ID: 10896326 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]