These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11177452)
1. Socio-economic aspects of extended STD screening in pregnancy. Postma MJ; Jager JC; de Jong-van den Berg LT AIDS Care; 2000 Dec; 12(6):731-5. PubMed ID: 11177452 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The economic profile of antenatal HIV testing: pharmaceutical and methodological considerations. Postma MJ; Beck EJ; Sprenger HG; de Jong-van den Berg LT AIDS; 2003 Mar; 17(5):755-7. PubMed ID: 12646801 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost-effectiveness of integrated routine offering of prenatal HIV and syphilis screening in China. Owusu-Edusei K; Tao G; Gift TL; Wang A; Wang L; Tun Y; Wei X; Wang L; Fuller S; Kamb ML; Bulterys M Sex Transm Dis; 2014 Feb; 41(2):103-10. PubMed ID: 24413489 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in Dutch pregnant women. Rours GI; Smith-Norowitz TA; Ditkowsky J; Hammerschlag MR; Verkooyen RP; de Groot R; Verbrugh HA; Postma MJ Pathog Glob Health; 2016; 110(7-8):292-302. PubMed ID: 27958189 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cost-effectiveness of widespread screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. Postma MJ; Welte R; Morré SA Expert Opin Pharmacother; 2002 Oct; 3(10):1443-50. PubMed ID: 12387690 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The cost effectiveness of universal antenatal screening for HIV in New Zealand. Bramley D; Graves N; Walker D AIDS; 2003 Mar; 17(5):741-8. PubMed ID: 12646798 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cost-effectiveness of partner pharmacotherapy in screening women for asymptomatic infection with Chlamydia Trachomatis. Postma MJ; Welte R; van den Hoek JA; van Doornum GJ; Jager HC; Coutinho RA Value Health; 2001; 4(3):266-75. PubMed ID: 11705188 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Risk assessment and other screening options for gonorrhoea and chlamydial infections in women attending rural Tanzanian antenatal clinics. Mayaud P; Grosskurth H; Changalucha J; Todd J; West B; Gabone R; Senkoro K; Rusizoka M; Laga M; Hayes R Bull World Health Organ; 1995; 73(5):621-30. PubMed ID: 8846488 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cost-effectiveness estimates for antenatal HIV testing in the Netherlands. Rozenbaum MH; Verweel G; Folkerts DK; Dronkers F; van den Hoek JA; Hartwig NG; de Groot R; Postma MJ Int J STD AIDS; 2008 Oct; 19(10):668-75. PubMed ID: 18824618 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Screening for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infection in pregnancy; cost-effectiveness favorable at a minimum prevalence rate of 3% or more]. Postma MJ; Bakker A; Welte R; van Bergen JE; van den Hoek JA; de Jong-van den Berg LT; Jager JC Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Dec; 144(49):2350-4. PubMed ID: 11129971 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cost-effectiveness of HIV and syphilis antenatal screening: a modelling study. Bristow CC; Larson E; Anderson LJ; Klausner JD Sex Transm Infect; 2016 Aug; 92(5):340-6. PubMed ID: 26920867 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Universal antenatal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing programme is cost-effective despite a low HIV prevalence in Hong Kong. Lee PM; Wong KH Hong Kong Med J; 2007 Jun; 13(3):199-207. PubMed ID: 17548908 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Systematic screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: estimating cost-effectiveness using dynamic modeling and Dutch data. de Vries R; van Bergen JE; de Jong-van den Berg LT; Postma MJ; Value Health; 2006; 9(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 16441519 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Chlamydia screening for pregnant women aged 16-25 years attending an antenatal service: a cost-effectiveness study. Ong JJ; Chen M; Hocking J; Fairley CK; Carter R; Bulfone L; Hsueh A BJOG; 2016 Jun; 123(7):1194-202. PubMed ID: 26307516 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Screening for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infection: cost-effectiveness favorable at a minimum prevalence rate of 3% or more]. Habets PC Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2001 Mar; 145(10):499-501. PubMed ID: 11268916 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis in sexually active population of Amsterdam. II. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening women]. Postma MJ; Welte R; van den Hoek JA; van Doornum GJ; Coutinho RA; Jager JC Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 Mar; 143(13):677-81. PubMed ID: 10321301 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Pharmaco-economic evaluation of mandatory HIV-screening in pregnancy; a cost-efficacy analysis in Amsterdam]. Postma MJ; van den Hoek JA; Beck EJ; Heeg B; Jager JC; Coutinho RA Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Apr; 144(16):749-54. PubMed ID: 10812443 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Would universal antenatal screening for HIV infection be cost-effective in a setting of very low prevalence? Modelling the data for Australia. Graves N; Walker DG; McDonald AM; Kaldor JM; Ziegler JB J Infect Dis; 2004 Jul; 190(1):166-74. PubMed ID: 15195257 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Perinatal HIV transmission and the cost-effectiveness of screening at 14 weeks gestation, at the onset of labour and the rapid testing of infants. Udeh B; Udeh C; Graves N BMC Infect Dis; 2008 Dec; 8():174. PubMed ID: 19117527 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Antenatal screening for HIV: time to embrace change. Ottewill M Br J Nurs; 2000 Jul 27-Aug 9; 9(14):908-14. PubMed ID: 11261026 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]