Page 84 - Screening for Cervical Cancer: Systematic Evidence Review

References

91. Slagel DD, Zaleski S, Cohen MB. Efficacy of automated cervical cytology screening.
Diagn Cytopathol. 1995;13:26-30.

92. Farnsworth A, Chambers FM, Goldschmidt CS. Evaluation of the PAPNET system in a
general pathology service. Med J Aust. 1996;165:429-431.

93. Ashfaq R, Saliger F, Solares B, et al. Evaluation of the PAPNET system for prescreening
triage of cervicovaginal smears. Acta Cytol. 1997;41:1058-1064.

94. Duggan MA, Brasher P. Paired comparison of manual and automated Pap test screening
using the PAPNET system. Diagn Cytopathol. 1997;17:248-254.

95. Halford JA, Wright RG, Ditchmen EJ. Quality assurance in cervical cytology screening.
Comparison of rapid rescreening and the PAPNET Testing System. Acta Cytol.
1997;41:79-81.

96. Jenny J, Isenegger I, Boon ME, Husain OA. Consistency of a double PAPNET scan of
cervical smears. Acta Cytol. 1997;41:82-87.

97. Kaufman RH, Schreiber K, Carter T. Analysis of atypical squamous (glandular) cells of
undetermined significance smears by neural network-directed review. Obstet
Gynecol. 1998;91:556-560.

98. Mango LJ, Valente PT. Neural-network-assisted analysis and microscopic rescreening in
presumed negative cervical cytologic smears. A comparison. Acta Cytologica.
1998;42:227-232.

99. Mitchell H, Medley G. Detection of unsuspected abnormalities by PAPNET-assisted
review. Acta Cytologica. 1998;42:260-264.

100. O'Leary TJ, Tellado M, Buckner SB, Ali IS, Stevens A, Ollayos CW. PAPNET-assisted
rescreening of cervical smears: cost and accuracy compared with a 100% manual
rescreening strategy. J Am Med Assoc. 1998;279:235-237.

101. Kok MR, Boon ME, Schreiner-Kok PG, Koss LG. Cytological recognition of invasive
squamous cancer of the uterine cervix: comparison of conventional light-
microscopical screening and neural network-based screening. Hum Pathol.
2000;31:23-28.

102. Corkill M, Knapp D, Martin J, Hutchinson ML. Specimen adequacy of ThinPrep sample
preparations in a direct-to-vial study. Acta Cytologica. 1997;41:39-44.

103. Lee KR, Ashfaq R, Birdsong GG, Corkill ME, McIntosh KM, Inhorn SL. Comparison of
conventional Papanicolaou smears and a fluid-based, thin-layer system for
cervical cancer screening. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90:278-284.

104. Roberts JM, Gurley AM, Thurloe JK, Bowditch R, Laverty CR. Evaluation of the
ThinPrep Pap test as an adjunct to the conventional Pap smear. Med J Aust.

90