Challenges in Cervical Cancer Screening: What Clinicians, Patients and the General Public Need to Know

Acta Cytologica

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 133-137

  Grohs, Dawn H ^a  

^a Cytopathology Division   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical smears; Computer Assisted; Image analysis; Laboratory diagnosis; Mass screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; LETTER; METHODOLOGY; STANDARD; UTERINE CERVIX TUMOR; VAGINA SMEAR;

ADULT; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 0029692089     PISSN: 00015547     EISSN: 19382650     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000333594     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bahr GF, Bibbo M, Oehme M, Puts JH, Reale FR, Wied GL: An automated device for the production of cell preparations suitable for automatic assessment. Acta Cytol 1978;22: 243-249
2. Bartels PH, Bahr GF, Bibbo M, Richards DL, Sonek MG, Wied GL: Analysis of variance of the Papanicolaou staining reaction. Acta Cytol 1974;18:522-531
3. Bogdanich W: The Pap test misses much cervical cancer through lab's errors. Wall Street J Nov 21, 1987
4. Boon ME, de Graaf Guilloud JC, Reitveld WJ: Analysis of five sampling methods for the preparation of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1988;33:843-848
5. Castleberry BM, Yablonsky T, Wargelin L: 1994 Wage and vacancy survey of medical laboratories. Lab Med 1995;26: 106-112
6. Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988. Public law 100-578. Fed Reg 1990;55:9538
7. Coppleson LW, Brown B: Estimation of screening error rate from observed detection rates in repeated cervical cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1974;119:953-958
8. Dytch HE, Wied GL: The computerized cytopathology laboratory. In Cytopathology of the Uterine Cervix. Edited by A Meisels, C Morin. Chicago, American Society of Clinical Pathologists Press, 1990, pp 213-241
9. Figge DC, Bennington JL, Schweid AI: Cervical cancer after initial negative and atypical vaginal cytology. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1970;108:422-428
10. Frost JK: Diagnostic accuracy of "cervical smears." Obstet Gynecol Surv 1969;24:893-898
11. Gay JD, Donaldson LD, Goellner JR: False-negative results in cervical cytologic studies. Acta Cytol 1985;29:1043-1046
12. Geyer JW, Hancock F, Carrco C, Kirkpatrick M: Preliminary evaluation of Cyto-Rich: An improved automated cytology preparation. Diagn Cytopathol 1993;9:417-422
13. Greening SE: The adequate Papanicolaou smear revisited. Diagn Cytopathol 1985;1:55-58
14. Haour P, Conti C: Advantages and disadvantages of the Feulgen reaction and histophotometric technique as applied to cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1956;2:326-327
15. Oud PS, Zahniser DJ, Harbers-Hendriks R, van Boekel MC, Raaijmakers MC, Vooijs PG: The development of a cervical smear preparation procedure for the BioPEPR Image Analysis System. Analyt Quant Cytol 1981;3:74-80
16. Papanicolaou GN: Proc of the Third Race Betterment Conference, Battle Creek, Michigan, Jan 2-6, 1928, p 528
17. Richart RM, Valiant HW: Influence of cell collection techniques upon cervical diagnosis. Cancer 1965;18:1474-1478
18. Schumann JL, O'Connor DM, Covell JL, Greening SE: Pap smear collection devices: Technical, clinical, diagnostic, and legal considerations associated with their use. Diagn Cy-topathol 1992;8:492-503
19. Vooijs PG, Elias A, van der Graff Y, Veling SHJ: Relationship between the diagnosis of epithelial abnormalities and the composition of cervical smears. Acta Cytol 1985;29:323-328