1994
DOI: 10.1093/labmed/25.4.258
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quality Assurance: Insight Into a Laboratory’s Performance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The drawback is that, given the prevalence of disease in most populations, it could take more than 10 years using this method to identify a CT with a high error rate if the threshold for an error is set at SIL. The percentage of diagnoses reclassified as unsatisfactory (UNS), ASC, or worse ranges from 12% to 94% [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] (Table 17.6). [15][16][17] Even when defined as an upgrade to atypical squamous cells (ASC) or worse, some have reported a frequency as low as 0.18%.…”
Section: Prospective 10% Rescreenmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The drawback is that, given the prevalence of disease in most populations, it could take more than 10 years using this method to identify a CT with a high error rate if the threshold for an error is set at SIL. The percentage of diagnoses reclassified as unsatisfactory (UNS), ASC, or worse ranges from 12% to 94% [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] (Table 17.6). [15][16][17] Even when defined as an upgrade to atypical squamous cells (ASC) or worse, some have reported a frequency as low as 0.18%.…”
Section: Prospective 10% Rescreenmentioning
confidence: 99%