Header Logo

Connection

Co-Authors

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications co-authored by Joan Walker and Michael Gold.
Joan Walker
Connection Strength
1.167
Michael Gold
  1. Tubal ligation frequency in Oklahoma women with cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2012 Nov; 127(2):278-82.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.105
  2. Human papillomavirus cofactors by disease progression and human papillomavirus types in the study to understand cervical cancer early endpoints and determinants. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009 Jan; 18(1):113-20.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.082
  3. Stage IVB endometrial cancer: does applying an ovarian cancer treatment paradigm result in similar outcomes? A case-control analysis. Gynecol Oncol. 2009 Feb; 112(2):337-41.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.082
  4. Cervical dysplasia among women over 35 years of age. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Nov; 199(5):471.e1-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.079
  5. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer: a review of complications and completion rates. Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Feb; 108(2):342-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.076
  6. Gynecologic Oncology Group risk groups for vulvar carcinoma: improvement in survival in the modern era. Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Sep; 106(3):521-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.074
  7. Preoperative predictors of positive margins after loop electrosurgical excisional procedure-Cone. Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Feb; 100(2):379-84.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.067
  8. Amifostine pretreatment for protection against topotecan-induced hematologic toxicity: results of a multicenter phase III trial in patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 2003 Aug; 90(2):325-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.056
  9. Impact of individual physicians on enrollment of patients into clinical trials. Am J Clin Oncol. 2003 Apr; 26(2):171-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.055
  10. Cytologic patterns of cervical adenocarcinomas with emphasis on factors associated with underdiagnosis. Cancer Cytopathol. 2018 11; 126(11):950-958.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  11. Comparison of Colposcopic Impression Based on Live Colposcopy and Evaluation of Static Digital Images. J Low Genit Tract Dis. 2016 Apr; 20(2):154-61.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  12. Multiple biopsies and detection of cervical cancer precursors at colposcopy. J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 01; 33(1):83-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  13. Factors associated with reduced accuracy in Papanicolaou tests for patients with invasive cervical cancer. Cancer Cytopathol. 2014 Sep; 122(9):694-701.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  14. Evaluation of clinical performance of a novel urine-based HPV detection assay among women attending a colposcopy clinic. J Clin Virol. 2014 Aug; 60(4):414-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.030
  15. Comparison of human papillomavirus detections in urine, vulvar, and cervical samples from women attending a colposcopy clinic. J Clin Microbiol. 2014 Jan; 52(1):187-92.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  16. Reproducibility of linear array for human papillomavirus genotyping. J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Feb; 51(2):625-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  17. Performance of p16/Ki-67 immunostaining to detect cervical cancer precursors in a colposcopy referral population. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Aug 01; 18(15):4154-62.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  18. Human papillomavirus load measured by Linear Array correlates with quantitative PCR in cervical cytology specimens. J Clin Microbiol. 2012 May; 50(5):1564-70.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  19. Clinical and pathological heterogeneity of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3. PLoS One. 2012; 7(1):e29051.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  20. Adjuvant chemotherapy for the "oldest old" ovarian cancer patients: can we anticipate toxicity-related treatment failure in a vulnerable population? Cancer. 2009 Apr 01; 115(7):1472-80.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  21. A randomized phase III trial of VH fibrin sealant to reduce lymphedema after inguinal lymph node dissection: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Jul; 110(1):76-82.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  22. Extraperitoneal para-aortic lymph node evaluation for cervical cancer via pfannenstiel incision: technique and peri-operative outcomes. Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Mar; 108(3):466-71.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  23. Pathologic findings and outcomes for octogenarians presenting with uterine malignancy. Gynecol Oncol. 2007 Sep; 106(3):572-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  24. Carcinosarcoma of the ovary-a case series. Gynecol Oncol. 2006 Jan; 100(1):128-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
  25. Towards improved biomarker studies of cervical neoplasia: effects of precolposcopic procedures on gene expression patterns. Diagn Mol Pathol. 2005 Jun; 14(2):59-64.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
  26. A comparison of stages IB1 and IB2 cervical cancers treated with radical hysterectomy. Is size the real difference? Gynecol Oncol. 2004 Oct; 95(1):70-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  27. Surgical-pathological predictors of disease-free survival and risk groupings for IB2 cervical cancer: do the traditional models still apply? Gynecol Oncol. 2004 Aug; 94(2):249-55.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.015
  28. Outpatient implantation of a central venous access system in gynecologic oncology patients. J Reprod Med. 2003 Nov; 48(11):875-81.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.014
  29. Laparoscopic pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection in the obese. Gynecol Oncol. 2002 Mar; 84(3):426-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.013
  30. Surgical management of early-stage endometrial cancer in the elderly: is laparoscopy feasible? Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Dec; 83(3):563-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.013
  31. Laparoscopic pelvic and paraaortic lymph node dissection: analysis of the first 100 cases. Gynecol Oncol. 2001 Sep; 82(3):498-503.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.012
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.