Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 152

1.

The effect of continuous monitoring of cytologic-histologic correlation data on cervical cancer screening performance.

Raab SS, Jones BA, Souers R, Tworek JA.

Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008 Jan;132(1):16-22. doi: 10.1043/1543-2165(2008)132[16:TEOCMO]2.0.CO;2.

PMID:
18181668
3.

Rapid review.

Faraker CA.

Cytopathology. 1998 Apr;9(2):71-6. Review. No abstract available.

PMID:
9660635
4.

Technologic advances for evaluation of cervical cytology: is newer better?

Hartmann KE, Nanda K, Hall S, Myers E.

Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2001 Dec;56(12):765-74. Review.

PMID:
11753179
5.

[An operative model: verification of the quality of the screening Pap test ].

Montanari GR, Arnaud S, Berardengo E, Campione D, Cozzani C, Parisio F, Viberti L, Ghiringhello B.

Pathologica. 2001 Oct;93(5):609-10. Italian. No abstract available.

PMID:
11725370
6.

Frequency and outcome of cervical cancer prevention failures in the United States.

Raab SS, Grzybicki DM, Zarbo RJ, Jensen C, Geyer SJ, Janosky JE, Meier FA, Vrbin CM, Carter G, Geisinger KR.

Am J Clin Pathol. 2007 Nov;128(5):817-24.

PMID:
17951205
7.

[Cervical cancer screening. False negative smears].

Vassilakos P, De Marval F, Muñoz M.

Rev Med Suisse Romande. 1997 Aug;117(8):597-601. Review. French. No abstract available.

PMID:
9340714
8.

Quality-assurance study of simultaneously sampled, non-correlating cervical cytology and biopsies.

Dodd LG, Sneige N, Villarreal Y, Fanning CV, Staerkel GA, Caraway NP, Silva EG, Katz RL.

Diagn Cytopathol. 1993;9(2):138-44.

PMID:
8513706
9.

Cervical cancer screening from the public health perspective.

Steiner C.

Acta Cytol. 1989 Jul-Aug;33(4):471-4.

PMID:
2750437
10.

Partial rescreening of all negative smears: an improved method of quality assurance in laboratories undertaking cervical screening.

Faraker CA.

Cytopathology. 1993;4(1):47-50. Erratum in: Cytopathology 1993;4(3):193.

PMID:
8453016
11.

Quality control and automation in cervical cytology.

Kumar N, Jain S.

J Indian Med Assoc. 2004 Jul;102(7):372, 374, 376 pasim. Review.

PMID:
15717583
12.

Improving Papanicolaou test quality and reducing medical errors by using Toyota production system methods.

Raab SS, Andrew-Jaja C, Condel JL, Dabbs DJ.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Jan;194(1):57-64.

PMID:
16389010
13.
14.

[Cervical cancer screening: past--present--future].

Breitenecker G.

Pathologe. 2009 Dec;30 Suppl 2:128-35. doi: 10.1007/s00292-009-1189-1. German.

PMID:
19756616
15.

Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of pap smears.

Arbyn M, Schenck U, Ellison E, Hanselaar A.

Cancer. 2003 Feb 25;99(1):9-16.

16.

Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review.

Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD, Matchar DB.

Ann Intern Med. 2000 May 16;132(10):810-9. Review.

PMID:
10819705
17.
18.

Rapid prescreening as a quality assurance measure in cervical cytology.

Repse-Fokter A, Caks-Golec T.

Acta Cytol. 2009 May-Jun;53(3):268-70.

PMID:
19534265
20.

Eliminating the diagnosis atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance: impact on the accuracy of the Papanicolaou test.

Sodhani P, Gupta S, Singh V, Sehgal A, Mitra AB.

Acta Cytol. 2004 Nov-Dec;48(6):783-7.

PMID:
15581162

Supplemental Content

Support Center