The Implementation of Nongynecologic Reporting Systems in Cytopathology Laboratories Is Highly Variable: Analysis of Data From a 2020 Supplemental Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology
In recent years, several reporting systems have been developed by national and international cytopathology organizations to standardize the evaluation of specific cytopathology specimen types. To assess the current implementation rates, implementation methods, and barriers to implementation of commo...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) 2024-05, Vol.148 (5), p.531-537 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 537 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 531 |
| container_title | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976) |
| container_volume | 148 |
| creator | VandenBussche, Christopher J Nwosu, Ann Souers, Rhona Sundling, Kaitlin E Brainard, Jennifer Goyal, Abha Lin, Xiaoqi Masood, Shala Nguyen, Lananh Roberson, Janie Tabbara, Sana O Booth, Christine |
| description | In recent years, several reporting systems have been developed by national and international cytopathology organizations to standardize the evaluation of specific cytopathology specimen types.
To assess the current implementation rates, implementation methods, and barriers to implementation of commonly used nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories.
Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee and distributed to participants in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing.
Nongynecologic reporting systems with the highest rate of adoption were the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology, 2nd edition (74.1%; 552 of 745); the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (53.9%; 397 of 736); and the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (29.1%; 200 of 688). The most common reason given for not adopting a reporting system was satisfaction with a laboratory's current system. Implementation varied among laboratories with regard to which stakeholders were involved in deciding to implement a system and the amount of education provided during the implementation process.
The implementation of nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories was highly variable. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.5858/arpa.2023-0010-CP |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2854970172</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A794075601</galeid><sourcerecordid>A794075601</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-4ca58acc82ce681d3c67fbc8989a8030d5ced6aaa336d706d9ca3d8558c4a02a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptks1v1DAQxQMC0aUgzlyQJSTEJcWJ43xwWwVKV6pgRQvXaNaZzbpy7NT2IuW_x2ZboFXlg2X798ZvRi9JXmf0hNe8_gB2gpOc5iylNKNpu36cLDJesDTPSv4kWVBKWdo0NT9Knjt3FY5NnmfPkiNWlZSVdbZ49Opyh2Q1TgpH1B68NJqYLflq9DBrFEaZQQryHSdjvdQDuZidx9ERqUk7ezOB30VmJuewMRa8sRIdWTlyJoedmslPsBI2Cj-SpQY1O-li-U_ggZxaMxIgwT8lF_vp1oIKB_sL58itIfwq5ATa__nSB7OtUQoHjM_LEa0UoAN3sCFd4Fbao1W3duYgGKfgwoXO1tYMFsZY6l6HsZnYx4vk6RaUw5c3-3Hy4_TzZXuWnn_7smqX56koSurTQgCvQYg6Fxjm2DNRVtuNqJu6gZoy2nOBfQkAjJV9Rcu-EcD6mvNaFEBzYMfJ-0PdyZrrPTrfjdIJVAo0mr3r8poXTUWzKg_o23voldnbME3XMcozypuiKf9RAyjspN4ab0HEot2yagpa8ZJmgUofoAbUaEEZjVsZru_wJw_wYfU4SvGg4N1_gh2C8jtn1D4Gy90FswMorHHO4rabrBzBzl1Gu5juLqa7i-nuYrq7dh00b24msd-M2P9V3MaZ_QY08voB</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3051059496</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Implementation of Nongynecologic Reporting Systems in Cytopathology Laboratories Is Highly Variable: Analysis of Data From a 2020 Supplemental Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Allen Press Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>VandenBussche, Christopher J ; Nwosu, Ann ; Souers, Rhona ; Sundling, Kaitlin E ; Brainard, Jennifer ; Goyal, Abha ; Lin, Xiaoqi ; Masood, Shala ; Nguyen, Lananh ; Roberson, Janie ; Tabbara, Sana O ; Booth, Christine</creator><creatorcontrib>VandenBussche, Christopher J ; Nwosu, Ann ; Souers, Rhona ; Sundling, Kaitlin E ; Brainard, Jennifer ; Goyal, Abha ; Lin, Xiaoqi ; Masood, Shala ; Nguyen, Lananh ; Roberson, Janie ; Tabbara, Sana O ; Booth, Christine</creatorcontrib><description>In recent years, several reporting systems have been developed by national and international cytopathology organizations to standardize the evaluation of specific cytopathology specimen types.
To assess the current implementation rates, implementation methods, and barriers to implementation of commonly used nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories.
Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee and distributed to participants in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing.
Nongynecologic reporting systems with the highest rate of adoption were the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology, 2nd edition (74.1%; 552 of 745); the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (53.9%; 397 of 736); and the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (29.1%; 200 of 688). The most common reason given for not adopting a reporting system was satisfaction with a laboratory's current system. Implementation varied among laboratories with regard to which stakeholders were involved in deciding to implement a system and the amount of education provided during the implementation process.
The implementation of nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories was highly variable.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9985</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1543-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2023-0010-CP</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37603681</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: College of American Pathologists</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Cellular biology ; Cytodiagnosis - methods ; Cytodiagnosis - standards ; Cytology ; Cytopathology ; Education ; Evaluation ; Exocrine glands ; Health surveys ; Histopathology ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Information systems ; Laboratories ; Laboratories - standards ; Laboratories, Clinical ; Language ; Medical research ; Medical societies ; Medicine, Experimental ; Pathologists ; Pathology, Cellular ; Pathology, Clinical - standards ; Questionnaires ; Regression analysis ; Salivary gland ; Societies, Medical ; Surveys ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Terminology ; Thyroid gland ; United States</subject><ispartof>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2024-05, Vol.148 (5), p.531-537</ispartof><rights>2024 College of American Pathologists.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2024 College of American Pathologists</rights><rights>Copyright College of American Pathologists May 2024</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-4ca58acc82ce681d3c67fbc8989a8030d5ced6aaa336d706d9ca3d8558c4a02a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37603681$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>VandenBussche, Christopher J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nwosu, Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Souers, Rhona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sundling, Kaitlin E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brainard, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goyal, Abha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Xiaoqi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Masood, Shala</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Lananh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberson, Janie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tabbara, Sana O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Booth, Christine</creatorcontrib><title>The Implementation of Nongynecologic Reporting Systems in Cytopathology Laboratories Is Highly Variable: Analysis of Data From a 2020 Supplemental Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology</title><title>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</title><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><description>In recent years, several reporting systems have been developed by national and international cytopathology organizations to standardize the evaluation of specific cytopathology specimen types.
To assess the current implementation rates, implementation methods, and barriers to implementation of commonly used nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories.
Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee and distributed to participants in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing.
Nongynecologic reporting systems with the highest rate of adoption were the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology, 2nd edition (74.1%; 552 of 745); the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (53.9%; 397 of 736); and the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (29.1%; 200 of 688). The most common reason given for not adopting a reporting system was satisfaction with a laboratory's current system. Implementation varied among laboratories with regard to which stakeholders were involved in deciding to implement a system and the amount of education provided during the implementation process.
The implementation of nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories was highly variable.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Cellular biology</subject><subject>Cytodiagnosis - methods</subject><subject>Cytodiagnosis - standards</subject><subject>Cytology</subject><subject>Cytopathology</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Exocrine glands</subject><subject>Health surveys</subject><subject>Histopathology</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Information systems</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Laboratories - standards</subject><subject>Laboratories, Clinical</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Medical research</subject><subject>Medical societies</subject><subject>Medicine, Experimental</subject><subject>Pathologists</subject><subject>Pathology, Cellular</subject><subject>Pathology, Clinical - standards</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Regression analysis</subject><subject>Salivary gland</subject><subject>Societies, Medical</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Terminology</subject><subject>Thyroid gland</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNptks1v1DAQxQMC0aUgzlyQJSTEJcWJ43xwWwVKV6pgRQvXaNaZzbpy7NT2IuW_x2ZboFXlg2X798ZvRi9JXmf0hNe8_gB2gpOc5iylNKNpu36cLDJesDTPSv4kWVBKWdo0NT9Knjt3FY5NnmfPkiNWlZSVdbZ49Opyh2Q1TgpH1B68NJqYLflq9DBrFEaZQQryHSdjvdQDuZidx9ERqUk7ezOB30VmJuewMRa8sRIdWTlyJoedmslPsBI2Cj-SpQY1O-li-U_ggZxaMxIgwT8lF_vp1oIKB_sL58itIfwq5ATa__nSB7OtUQoHjM_LEa0UoAN3sCFd4Fbao1W3duYgGKfgwoXO1tYMFsZY6l6HsZnYx4vk6RaUw5c3-3Hy4_TzZXuWnn_7smqX56koSurTQgCvQYg6Fxjm2DNRVtuNqJu6gZoy2nOBfQkAjJV9Rcu-EcD6mvNaFEBzYMfJ-0PdyZrrPTrfjdIJVAo0mr3r8poXTUWzKg_o23voldnbME3XMcozypuiKf9RAyjspN4ab0HEot2yagpa8ZJmgUofoAbUaEEZjVsZru_wJw_wYfU4SvGg4N1_gh2C8jtn1D4Gy90FswMorHHO4rabrBzBzl1Gu5juLqa7i-nuYrq7dh00b24msd-M2P9V3MaZ_QY08voB</recordid><startdate>20240501</startdate><enddate>20240501</enddate><creator>VandenBussche, Christopher J</creator><creator>Nwosu, Ann</creator><creator>Souers, Rhona</creator><creator>Sundling, Kaitlin E</creator><creator>Brainard, Jennifer</creator><creator>Goyal, Abha</creator><creator>Lin, Xiaoqi</creator><creator>Masood, Shala</creator><creator>Nguyen, Lananh</creator><creator>Roberson, Janie</creator><creator>Tabbara, Sana O</creator><creator>Booth, Christine</creator><general>College of American Pathologists</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20240501</creationdate><title>The Implementation of Nongynecologic Reporting Systems in Cytopathology Laboratories Is Highly Variable: Analysis of Data From a 2020 Supplemental Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology</title><author>VandenBussche, Christopher J ; Nwosu, Ann ; Souers, Rhona ; Sundling, Kaitlin E ; Brainard, Jennifer ; Goyal, Abha ; Lin, Xiaoqi ; Masood, Shala ; Nguyen, Lananh ; Roberson, Janie ; Tabbara, Sana O ; Booth, Christine</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c460t-4ca58acc82ce681d3c67fbc8989a8030d5ced6aaa336d706d9ca3d8558c4a02a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Cellular biology</topic><topic>Cytodiagnosis - methods</topic><topic>Cytodiagnosis - standards</topic><topic>Cytology</topic><topic>Cytopathology</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Exocrine glands</topic><topic>Health surveys</topic><topic>Histopathology</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Information systems</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Laboratories - standards</topic><topic>Laboratories, Clinical</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Medical research</topic><topic>Medical societies</topic><topic>Medicine, Experimental</topic><topic>Pathologists</topic><topic>Pathology, Cellular</topic><topic>Pathology, Clinical - standards</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Regression analysis</topic><topic>Salivary gland</topic><topic>Societies, Medical</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Terminology</topic><topic>Thyroid gland</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>VandenBussche, Christopher J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nwosu, Ann</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Souers, Rhona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sundling, Kaitlin E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brainard, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goyal, Abha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Xiaoqi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Masood, Shala</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nguyen, Lananh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roberson, Janie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tabbara, Sana O</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Booth, Christine</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>VandenBussche, Christopher J</au><au>Nwosu, Ann</au><au>Souers, Rhona</au><au>Sundling, Kaitlin E</au><au>Brainard, Jennifer</au><au>Goyal, Abha</au><au>Lin, Xiaoqi</au><au>Masood, Shala</au><au>Nguyen, Lananh</au><au>Roberson, Janie</au><au>Tabbara, Sana O</au><au>Booth, Christine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Implementation of Nongynecologic Reporting Systems in Cytopathology Laboratories Is Highly Variable: Analysis of Data From a 2020 Supplemental Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology</atitle><jtitle>Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976)</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Pathol Lab Med</addtitle><date>2024-05-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>148</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>531</spage><epage>537</epage><pages>531-537</pages><issn>0003-9985</issn><issn>1543-2165</issn><eissn>1543-2165</eissn><abstract>In recent years, several reporting systems have been developed by national and international cytopathology organizations to standardize the evaluation of specific cytopathology specimen types.
To assess the current implementation rates, implementation methods, and barriers to implementation of commonly used nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories.
Data were analyzed from a survey developed by the College of American Pathologists Cytopathology Committee and distributed to participants in the College of American Pathologists Nongynecologic Cytopathology Education Program mailing.
Nongynecologic reporting systems with the highest rate of adoption were the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology, 2nd edition (74.1%; 552 of 745); the Paris System for Reporting Urinary Cytology (53.9%; 397 of 736); and the Milan System for Reporting Salivary Gland Cytopathology (29.1%; 200 of 688). The most common reason given for not adopting a reporting system was satisfaction with a laboratory's current system. Implementation varied among laboratories with regard to which stakeholders were involved in deciding to implement a system and the amount of education provided during the implementation process.
The implementation of nongynecologic reporting systems in cytopathology laboratories was highly variable.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>College of American Pathologists</pub><pmid>37603681</pmid><doi>10.5858/arpa.2023-0010-CP</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0003-9985 |
| ispartof | Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (1976), 2024-05, Vol.148 (5), p.531-537 |
| issn | 0003-9985 1543-2165 1543-2165 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2854970172 |
| source | MEDLINE; Allen Press Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
| subjects | Algorithms Cellular biology Cytodiagnosis - methods Cytodiagnosis - standards Cytology Cytopathology Education Evaluation Exocrine glands Health surveys Histopathology Hospitals Humans Information systems Laboratories Laboratories - standards Laboratories, Clinical Language Medical research Medical societies Medicine, Experimental Pathologists Pathology, Cellular Pathology, Clinical - standards Questionnaires Regression analysis Salivary gland Societies, Medical Surveys Surveys and Questionnaires Terminology Thyroid gland United States |
| title | The Implementation of Nongynecologic Reporting Systems in Cytopathology Laboratories Is Highly Variable: Analysis of Data From a 2020 Supplemental Survey of Participants in the College of American Pathologists Interlaboratory Comparison Program in Nongynecologic Cytology |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T10%3A58%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Implementation%20of%20Nongynecologic%20Reporting%20Systems%20in%20Cytopathology%20Laboratories%20Is%20Highly%20Variable:%20Analysis%20of%20Data%20From%20a%202020%20Supplemental%20Survey%20of%20Participants%20in%20the%20College%20of%20American%20Pathologists%20Interlaboratory%20Comparison%20Program%20in%20Nongynecologic%20Cytology&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20pathology%20&%20laboratory%20medicine%20(1976)&rft.au=VandenBussche,%20Christopher%20J&rft.date=2024-05-01&rft.volume=148&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=531&rft.epage=537&rft.pages=531-537&rft.issn=0003-9985&rft.eissn=1543-2165&rft_id=info:doi/10.5858/arpa.2023-0010-CP&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA794075601%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3051059496&rft_id=info:pmid/37603681&rft_galeid=A794075601&rfr_iscdi=true |