| pubmed-article:9479340 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0243139 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0205064 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0010799 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0557854 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0205547 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1519205 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:issue | 1 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:dateCreated | 1998-3-11 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:abstractText | To eliminate the disadvantages and inherent bias of split-sample studies by evaluating the relative performance of monolayers and conventional cervical cytologic smears in a single laboratory through evaluation of two large and similar, randomly derived patient groups from the same geographical and demographically similar population. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:citationSubset | IM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:issn | 0001-5547 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:CampanaAA | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:VassilakosPP | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:GriffinSS | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:MegevandEE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:issnType | Print | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:volume | 42 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:pagination | 198-202 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:dateRevised | 2006-11-15 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:9479340-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:articleTitle | CytoRich liquid-based cervical cytologic test. Screening results in a routine cytopathology service. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:affiliation | Center for Cytology and Clinical Pathology, University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:publicationType | Clinical Trial | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:publicationType | Comparative Study | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:publicationType | Randomized Controlled Trial | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:9479340 | pubmed:publicationType | Multicenter Study | lld:pubmed |
| http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | pubmed:referesTo | pubmed-article:9479340 | lld:pubmed |
| http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | pubmed:referesTo | pubmed-article:9479340 | lld:pubmed |
| http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | pubmed:referesTo | pubmed-article:9479340 | lld:pubmed |
