1999
DOI: 10.1159/000331079
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

False Negative Rate of Cervical Cytologic Smear Screening as Determined by Rapid Rescreening

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
15
0
2

Year Published

1999
1999
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
2
15
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…As in previous studies in the literature, [22][23][24][25]29,31,32 our experience with RPS shows that it is an efficient and practical QC strategy in gynecologic cytology because it provides a measurable parameter with which to monitor the sensitivity of the Pap smears and allows for timely corrections before releasing the results to the clinicians.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 60%
“…As in previous studies in the literature, [22][23][24][25]29,31,32 our experience with RPS shows that it is an efficient and practical QC strategy in gynecologic cytology because it provides a measurable parameter with which to monitor the sensitivity of the Pap smears and allows for timely corrections before releasing the results to the clinicians.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 60%
“…That the examiner was aware there were not only normal smears but also abnormal ones in that batch of smears may explain these findings, and this is precisely the benefit of rapid prescreening. 17,28,[39][40][41] It is already known that the principal difference between rapid prescreening and 100% rapid review is that rapidly screening only those smears considered normal or unsatisfactory at routine screening means evaluating a group of smears in which the incidence of abnormality is low. This is a tedious task that may reduce concentration and result in screening errors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There have been increasing adverse press reports focusing mainly on screening errors. "Rapid review" 24 was introduced as a measure of quality control on a national level.…”
Section: Screeningmentioning
confidence: 99%