Online citations, reference lists, and bibliographies.
← Back to Search

Consensus Conference On Second Opinions In Diagnostic Anatomic Pathology. Who, What, And When.

J. Tomaszewski, H. Bear, J. Connally, J. Epstein, M. Feldman, K. Foucar, L. Layfield, V. Livolsi, R. Sirota, M. Stoler, R. E. Stombler
Published 2000 · Medicine

Cite This
Download PDF
Analyze on Scholarcy
Share
Consensus Conference on Second Opinions in Diagnostic Anatomic Pathology: Who, What, and When John E. Tomaszewski, MD, FASCP (chair),1 Harry D. Bear, MD, PhD, FACS,2, Julia A. Connally,3 Jonathan I. Epstein, MD,4 Michael Feldman, MD, PhD, FASCP,5, Kathryn Foucar, MD, FASCP,6 Lester Layfield, MD,7 Virginia LiVolsi, MD, FASCP,8, Ronald L. Sirota, MD, FASCP,9 Mark H. Stoler, MD, FASCP,10 and Robin E. Stombler11
This paper references



This paper is referenced by
10.1097/PCR.0B013E3181A05E5F
Institutional Second Opinion
Nate Lueck (2009)
10.1002/DC.2044
Interinstitutional review of thyroid fine‐needle aspirations: Impact on clinical management of thyroid nodules
Z. Baloch (2001)
10.1309/AJCP5M1FAMLCYNPX
Physician productivity: issues and controversies.
Amy Storfa (2015)
10.5772/52620
Risks and Benefits of Liver Biopsy in Focal Liver Disease
L. Streba (2012)
10.1111/his.12940
Any value in a specialist review of liver biopsies? Conclusions of a 4‐year review
A. L. Paterson (2016)
10.1007/s00428-015-1738-3
Improved cytodiagnostics and quality of patient care through double reading of selected cases by an expert cytopathologist
C. Kuijpers (2015)
10.1097/01.pcr.0000163612.21829.f4
Institutional Review of Outside Papanicolaou SmearsBefore Definitive Treatment for Cervical SquamousEpithelial Lesions: A Possibly Cost-Effective Procedure
J. Irie (2005)
10.1136/jclinpath-2015-203488
Improved quality of patient care through routine second review of histopathology specimens prior to multidisciplinary meetings
C. Kuijpers (2016)
10.1309/DDKV-E4YP-CJ5Q-3M4V
Error in anatomic pathology.
E. Foucar (2001)
10.1043/1543-2165(2005)129[1237:EDIAP]2.0.CO;2
Error detection in anatomic pathology.
R. Zarbo (2005)
10.1177/1066896916657591
Voluntary Second Opinions in Pediatric Bone and Soft Tissue Pathology
Alyaa Al-Ibraheemi (2016)
10.1016/J.HUMPATH.2007.01.016
Anatomical pathology in the 21st century: the great paradigm shift.
W. Murphy (2007)
10.1002/dc.21820
Clinical impact of second opinion in thyroid fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC): A study of 922 interinstitutional consultations
Jaya Bajaj (2012)
10.1200/JCO.2006.07.0250
Prognostic significance of human epidermal growth factor receptor positivity for the development of brain metastasis after newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Z. Gabos (2006)
10.1111/j.1572-0241.2001.05273.x
Second opinion pathology in liver biopsy interpretation
P. Bejarano (2001)
Diagnostic Error: Is Overconfidence the Problem?
M. Graber (2008)
10.1016/j.amjmed.2008.01.001
Overconfidence as a cause of diagnostic error in medicine.
E. Berner (2008)
10.1002/jso.23788
Breast pathology second review identifies clinically significant discrepancies in over 10% of patients
Laila Khazai (2015)
10.1016/J.ANNPAT.2008.09.044
Impacts des avis diagnostiques de cancérologie en Aquitaine. Étude quantitative, qualitative et médicoéconomique rétrospective sur une année
N. Lapeyrere (2008)
10.1200/JOP.2013.001204
Second-opinion pathologic review is a patient safety mechanism that helps reduce error and decrease waste.
L. Middleton (2014)
10.1002/hep.22742
Liver biopsy
D. Rockey (2009)
10.1002/JSO.20897
The value of expert second opinion in diagnosis of soft tissue sarcomas
M. Lehnhardt (2008)
10.1043/1543-2165(2003)127<1489:IOSBBG>2.0.CO;2
Interpretation of skin biopsies by general pathologists: diagnostic discrepancy rate measured by blinded review.
M. Trotter (2003)
10.1309/23NYGNB2HFNNW4V8
What is the best indicator to determine anatomic pathology workload? Canadian experience.
R. T. A. Maung (2005)
10.1097/PAP.0b013e3181f89561
Recent Trends in Quality, Patient Safety, and Error Reduction in Nongyn Cytology
J. Silverman (2010)
10.1186/1471-2407-10-150
Epidemiological evaluation of concordance between initial diagnosis and central pathology review in a comprehensive and prospective series of sarcoma patients in the Rhone-Alpes region
A. Lurkin (2009)
10.1002/cncy.20037
Interinstitutional consultation in fine‐needle aspiration cytopathology
Philip E Bomeisl (2009)
10.3332/ecancer.2019.929
Relevance of minor discrepancies at second pathology review in gynaecological cancer
L. Minig (2019)
10.1309/425H-NW4W-XC9A-005H
Consultative (expert) second opinions in soft tissue pathology. Analysis of problem-prone diagnostic situations.
Z. K. Arbiser (2001)
10.1007/BF02574516
Changes in breast cancer therapy because of pathology second opinions
V. Staradub (2007)
10.1097/PAS.0b013e31815a04f5
Mandatory Second Opinion in Surgical Pathology Referral Material: Clinical Consequences of Major Disagreements
Elizabeth Manion (2008)
10.1097/01.pas.0000126772.42945.5c
Error in Surgical Pathology
D. Troxel (2004)
See more
Semantic Scholar Logo Some data provided by SemanticScholar