The Dutch CISOE-A framework for cytology reporting increases efficacy or screening upon standardisation since 1996

Journal of Clinical Pathology

Volumn 57, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 388-393

  Bulk, S ^a   Van Kemenade, F J ^b   Rozendaal, L ^a   Meijer, C J L M ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b Screenings Organisatie B   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SCREENING; CYTOPATHOLOGY; DYSKARYOSIS; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; NETHERLANDS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; STANDARDIZATION; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA; UTERINE CERVIX CARCINOMA IN SITU; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; CERVICAL INTRAEPITHELIAL NEOPLASIA; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REFERRAL AND CONSULTATION; UTERINE CERVICAL NEOPLASMS; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 1842454816     PISSN: 00219746     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jcp.2003.011841     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. van Ballegooijen M, Hermens R. Cervical cancer screening in the Netherlands. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:2244-6.
2. Mitchell H, Medley G, Gordon I, et al. Cervical cytology reported as negative and risk of adenocarcinoma of the cervix: no strong evidence of benefit. Br J Cancer 1995;71:894-7.
3. Hanselaar AG. Criteria for organized cervical screening programs. Special emphasis on The Netherlands program. Acta Cytol 2002;46:619-29.
4. Wright TC Jr, Cox JT, Massad LS, et al. 2001 consensus guidelines for the management of women with cervical cytologicol abnormalities. JAMA 2002;287:2120-9.
5. Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, et al. The 2001 Bethesda system: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA 2002;287:2114-19.
6. Bos AB, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al. Women who participate in spontaneous screening are not at higher risk for cervical cancer than women who attend programme screening. Eur J Cancer 2002;38:827-31.
7. Colgan T, Clarke A, Hakh N, et al. Screening for cervical disease in mature women. Cancer 2002;96:195-203.
8. Anttila A, Pukkala E, Soderman B, et al. Effect of organised screening on cervical cancer incidence and mortality in Finland, 1963-1995: recent increase in cervical cancer incidence. Int J Cancer 1999;83:59-65.
9. Sasieni P, Adams J. Changing rates of adenocarcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the cervix in England. Lancet 2001;357:1490-3.
10. Bos AB, van Ballegooijen M, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al. Non-progression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia estimated from population-screening data. Br J Cancer 1997;75:124-30.
11. Gustafsson L, Adami HO. Natural history of cervical neoplasia: consistent results obtained by an identification technique. Br J Cancer 1989;60:132-41.
12. van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD. Epidemiological evidence for age-dependent regression of pre-invasive cervical cancer. Br J Cancer 1991;64:559-65.
13. van Oortmarssen GJ, Habbema JD. Duration of preclinical cervical cancer and reduction in incidence of invasive cancer following negative pap smears. Int J Epidemiol 1995;24:300-7.