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

195 related items for PubMed ID: 9987447

  • 21. 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 25; 84(5):273-80. PubMed ID: 9801201
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Performance of the AutoPap primary screening system at Jefferson University Hospital.
    Bibbo M, Hawthorne C.
    Acta Cytol; 1999 Oct 25; 43(1):27-9. PubMed ID: 9987446
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Detection of unsuspected abnormalities by PAPNET-assisted review.
    Mitchell H, Medley G.
    Acta Cytol; 1998 Oct 25; 42(1):260-4. PubMed ID: 9479349
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. Neural network processing of cervical smears can lead to a decrease in diagnostic variability and an increase in screening efficacy: a study of 63 false-negative smears.
    Boon ME, Kok LP, Nygaard-Nielsen M, Holm K, Holund B.
    Mod Pathol; 1994 Dec 25; 7(9):957-61. PubMed ID: 7892166
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. [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 25; 90(4):357-63. PubMed ID: 9793395
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. 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 Aug 25; 43(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 9987444
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. PAPNET Testing System. Technical update.
    Denaro TJ, Herriman JM, Shapira O.
    Acta Cytol; 1997 Aug 25; 41(1):65-73. PubMed ID: 9022728
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Prospective study of PAPNET: review of 25,656 Pap smears negative on manual screening and rapid rescreening.
    Halford JA, Wright RG, Ditchmen EJ.
    Cytopathology; 1999 Oct 25; 10(5):317-23. PubMed ID: 10588350
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. 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 25; 30(4):339-47. PubMed ID: 9041745
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. Significant reduction in the rate of false-negative cervical smears with neural network-based technology (PAPNET Testing System).
    Koss LG, Sherman ME, Cohen MB, Anes AR, Darragh TM, Lemos LB, McClellan BJ, Rosenthal DL, Keyhani-Rofagha S, Schreiber K, Valente PT.
    Hum Pathol; 1997 Oct 25; 28(10):1196-203. PubMed ID: 9343327
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. 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, National Institute of Health Coordinating Group.
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2002 Oct 25; 23(3):211-5. PubMed ID: 12094957
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. Cost analysis of PAPNET-assisted vs. conventional Pap smear evaluation in primary screening of cervical smears.
    Meerding WJ, Doornewaard H, van Ballegooijen M, Bos A, van der Graaf Y, van den Tweel JG, van der Schouw YT, Habbema JD.
    Acta Cytol; 2001 Oct 25; 45(1):28-35. PubMed ID: 11213501
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Observer variation in cytologic grading for cervical dysplasia of Papanicolaou smears with the PAPNET testing system.
    Doornewaard H, van der Schouw YT, van der Graaf Y, Bos AB, van den Tweel JG.
    Cancer; 1999 Aug 25; 87(4):178-83. PubMed ID: 10455204
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. The PAPNET system for quality control of cervical smears: validation and limits.
    Cenci M, Nagar C, Giovagnoli MR, Vecchione A.
    Anticancer Res; 1997 Aug 25; 17(6D):4731-4. PubMed ID: 9494597
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. PAPNET analysis of reportedly negative smears preceding the diagnosis of a high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion or carcinoma.
    Sherman ME, Mango LJ, Kelly D, Paull G, Ludin V, Copeland C, Solomon D, Schiffman MH.
    Mod Pathol; 1994 Jun 25; 7(5):578-81. PubMed ID: 7937724
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Evaluation of PAPNET system for rescreening of negative cervical smears.
    Ashfaq R, Liang Y, Saboorian MH.
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1995 Jul 25; 13(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 7587873
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Comparison of Papnet-assisted and manual screening of cervical smears.
    Losell K, Dejmek A.
    Diagn Cytopathol; 1999 Oct 25; 21(4):296-9. PubMed ID: 10495327
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Papnet-assisted, primary screening of cervico-vaginal smears.
    Duggan MA.
    Eur J Gynaecol Oncol; 2000 Oct 25; 21(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 10726616
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 10.