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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

90 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11229381)

  • 61. DROP IN RATES OF CHLAMYDIA TESTING ATTRIBUTED TO LESS FREQUENT CERVICAL CANCER SCREENING.
    Bond S
    J Midwifery Womens Health; 2016; 61(1):123-4. PubMed ID: 26824201
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Feasibility of recruiting in a student bar for a trial of chlamydia screening in young women.
    Hay S; Hay P; Oakeshott P
    Fam Pract; 2004 Apr; 21(2):223-4. PubMed ID: 15020399
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Chlamydia screening can have high take-up rates if right methodology is used.
    Macleod J; Smith GD
    BMJ; 1999 Jul; 319(7203):188-9. PubMed ID: 10406769
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. Chlamydia screening and sexual health.
    Hart GJ; Duncan B; Fenton KA
    Sex Transm Infect; 2002 Dec; 78(6):396-7. PubMed ID: 12473797
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Maximising the effectiveness of the National Chlamydia Screening Programme in England: should we routinely retest positives?
    Woodhall SC; Turner KM; Hughes G
    Sex Transm Infect; 2013 Feb; 89(1):2-3. PubMed ID: 23337659
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Management of screened chlamydia positive women.
    Hopwood JJ; Mallinson H; Ghosh A; Hernon M
    Sex Transm Infect; 2002 Apr; 78(2):155-6. PubMed ID: 12081186
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. Government to press trusts to meet screening targets for chlamydia.
    White C
    BMJ; 2008 Feb; 336(7639):299. PubMed ID: 18258958
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. New concepts in screening.
    Gray JA
    Br J Gen Pract; 2004 Apr; 54(501):292-8. PubMed ID: 15113498
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Cabbages and condoms.
    Ebrahim S
    Int J Epidemiol; 2009 Apr; 38(2):327-9. PubMed ID: 19348059
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Laboratory aspects of screening men for Chlamydia trachomatis in the new millennium.
    Gaydos CA; Ferrero DV; Papp J
    Sex Transm Dis; 2008 Nov; 35(11 Suppl):S45-50. PubMed ID: 18449069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Evidence is not (yet) enough for evidence based policy for chlamydia screening.
    ClaSS Study Group
    BMJ; 2001 Feb; 322(7282):364-5. PubMed ID: 11229381
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Commentary: Chlamydia trachomatis screening: what are we trying to do?
    Peterman TA; Gottlieb SL; Berman SM
    Int J Epidemiol; 2009 Apr; 38(2):449-51. PubMed ID: 19174542
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Screening for chlamydia: seize the day.
    Randall S; LaMontagne DS
    J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care; 2005 Apr; 31(2):98-100. PubMed ID: 15921540
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Screening for pharyngeal Chlamydia trachomatis in asymptomatic men who have sex with men.
    Coughlan E; Young S
    N Z Med J; 2006 Apr; 119(1232):U1948. PubMed ID: 16633402
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Evidence based health policy report. Screening for genital chlamydial infection.
    Pimenta J; Catchpole M; Gray M; Hopwood J; Randall S
    BMJ; 2000 Sep; 321(7261):629-31. PubMed ID: 10977848
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.