Rapid review in cervical cytology: A retrospective review of cases detected on rapid review within a DGH cytology department and subsequent outcome

Cytopathology

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 93-96

  Wilson, N J ^a   Molyneux, A J ^a  

^a NORTHAMPTON GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cervical cytology; Follow up; Positive predictive value; Rapid review

Indexed keywords

BIOPSY; CYTOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SCREENING TEST; STANDARD; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UTERINE CERVIX CYTOLOGY;

DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HOSPITALS, GENERAL; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VAGINAL SMEARS;

EID: 1842684043     PISSN: 09565507     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2004.00134.x     Document Type: Review

References (15)

1. Faraker CA, Boxer ME. Rapid review (partial rescreening) of cervical cytology. Four years experience and quality assurance implications. J Clin Pathol 1996;49:587-91.
2. Dudding N, Hewer EM, Lancucki L, Rice S. Rapid screening: a comparative study. Cytopathology 2001; 12:235-48.
3. Faraker CA. Partial rescreening of all negative smears: an improved method of quality assurance in laboratories undertaking cervical screening. Cytopathology 1993;4:47-50.
4. Herbert A, Johnson J, Patnick J. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting and criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology. Cytopathology 1995;6:301-3.
5. Baker A, Melcher D, Smith R. Role of re-screening of cervical smears in internal quality control. J Clin Pathol 1995;48:1002-4.
6. Mitchell H, Medley G. Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnoses. Cytopathology 1995;6:368-75.
7. Leopold G, Koss MD. The Papanicolaou test for cervical cancer detection. A triumph and a tragedy. JAMA 1989;261:737-43.
8. BSCC. Recommended code of practice for laboratories providing a cytopathology service 1997. Cytopathology 1997;(Suppl. 1).
9. Baker A, Melcher MD. Rapid cervical cytology screening. Cytopathology 1991;2:299-301.
10. Heatley MK, Bury JP. The correlation between the grade of dyskaryosis on cervical smear, grade of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) on punch biopsy and the final histological diagnosis on cone biopsy. Cytopathology 1998;9:93-9.
11. Walker EM, Dodgson J, Duncan ID. Does mild atypia on a cervical smear warrant further investigation? Lancet 1986;2:672-3.
12. Robertson JH, Woodend B. Negative cytology preceding cervical cancer: causes and prevention. J Clin Pathol 1993;46:700-2.
13. Johnson SJ, Hair T, Gibson L, Ridley B, Wadehara V. An assessment of rapid review as an internal quality control method for cervical smears. Cytopathology 1995;6:376-87.
14. Shield PW, Cox NC. The sensitivity of rapid (partial) review of cervical smears. Cytopathology 1998;9:84-92.
15. Smith PA, Turnbull LS. Small cell and 'pale' dyskaryosis. Cytopathology 1997;8:3-8.