Arbyn M, Schenck U, Ellison E, Hanselaar A (2003). Metaanalysis of the accuracy of rapid prescreening relative to full screening of Pap smears. Cancer 99:9-16.
Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J et al. (2008). European guidelines for Quality Assurance in Cervical Cancer Screening. 2nd edition. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008 Available as http://screening.iarc.fr/doc/ND7007117ENC_002.pdf
Bigras G, Rieder MA, Lambercy JM et al. (2003). Keeping collecting device in liquid medium is mandatory to ensure optimized liquid-based cervical cytologic sampling. J Low Genit Tract Dis;7:168-74.
Blanks RG (2012). ABC3 Part II: a review of the new criteria for evaluating cervical cytology in England. Cytopathology 23:360-70.
Blanks RG, Kelly RS (2010). Comparison of cytology and histology results in English cervical screening laboratories before and after liquid-based cytology conversion: do the data provide evidence for a single category of high-grade dyskaryosis? Cytopathology 21:368-73.
Butland D, Herbert A (1996). Comparison of Cervical Cytology Reporting Rates: a useful adjunct to external quality assurance. Cytopathology 7:391-9.
Demay RM (2000). Hyperchromatic crowded groups: pitfalls in pap smear diagnosis. Am J Clin Pathol 114:Suppl:S36-43.
Dudding N, Hewer EM, Lancucki L, Rice S (2001a). Rapid screening: a comparative study. Cytopathology 12:235-48.
Dudding N, Renshaw AA, Ellis K (2011b). Rapid pre-screening is more sensitive in liquid-based cytology than in conventional smears. Acta Cytol 55:54-6.
Evans KK, Tambouret RH, Evered A, Wilbur DC, Wolfe JM (2011). Prevalence of abnormalities influences cytologists’ error rates in screening for cervical cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 135:1557-60.
Faraker CA, Boxer ME (1996). Rapid review (partial rescreening) of cervical cytology. Four years experience of quality assurance implications. J Clin Pathol 49:587-91.
Faraker CA, Greenfield J (2013). Tranformation zone sampling rate used as a performance indicator for liquid-based cytology sample-takers. Cytopathology 24:222-7.
Gupta N, John D, Dudding N, Crossley J, Smith JH (2013). Factors contributing to false-negative and potential false-negative cytology reports in SurePath liquid-based cytology. Cytopathology 24:39-43.
HSCIC 2014. Cervical Screening Programme, England, Statistics for 2013-14. Health and Social Care Information Centre 2014.
Hutchinson M, Zahniser DJ, Sherman ME et al. (1999). Utility of liquid-based cytology for cervical carcinoma screening: results of a population-based study conducted in a region of Costa Rica with a high incidence of cervical carcinoma. Cancer 87:48-55.
Leung KM, Lam KK, Tse PY, Yeog GP, Chan KW (2008). Characteristics of false-negative ThinPrep cervical smears in women with high-grade intraepithelial lesions. Hong Kong Med J 14:292-5.
Manrique EJ, Amaral RG, Tavares SB et al. (2006). Evaluation of 100% rapid rescreening of negative cervical smears as a quality assurance measure. Cytopathology 17:116-20.
Mitchell H, Medley G (1995). Differences between Papanicolaou smears with correct and incorrect diagnosis. Cytopathology 6:368-75.
NHSCSP 2003a. Laboratory Organisation. A guide for laboratories participating in the NHS Cervical Screening Programme. NHSCSP Publication No. 14. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes January 2003. Available as www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp14.pdf
NHSCSP 2003b. Ergonomic working standards for personnel engaged in the preparation, scanning and reporting of cervical screening slides. NHSCSP standard previously referenced as MDA standard 02104. NHSCSP Publication No. 17. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes September 2003. Available as www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp17.pdf
NHSCSP 2006a. Audit of invasive cervical cancers. NHSCSP Publication No. 28. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes December 2006. Available as www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp28.pdf
NHSCSP 2006b. Taking samples for cervical screening: a resource pack for trainers. NHSCSP Publication No. 23 April 2006. Available as www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp23.pdf
NHSCSP 2013. Achievable standards, benchmarks for reporting, and criteria for evaluating cervical cytopathology, third edition including revised performance indicators. NHSCSP Publication No. 1 January 2003. Available as www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/nhscsp01.pdf
Umana A, Dunsmore H, Herbert A, Jokhan A, Kubba A (2013). Are significant numbers lost on the discarded ThinPrep broom when used for cervical cytology? Cytopathology 24:228-34.
Renshaw AA (2000). Analysis of error in calculating the false-negative rate in the interpretation of cervicovaginal smears. Cancer Cytopathol 81:264-71.
Roberts JM, Thurloe JK, Bowditch RC et al (2007). Three-armed trial of the ThinPrep Imager compared with conventional cytology: prospective study. Diagn Cytopathol 35:96-102.
Robertson JH, Woodend B (1993). Negative cytology preceding cervical cancer: causes and prevention. J Clin Pathol 46:700-2.
Wiener HG, Klinkhamer P, Schenck U et al. (2007). European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: recommendations for cytology laboratories. Cytopathology 18: 76-78.