186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11264602)
1. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in asymptomatic women in Hungary. An epidemiological and cost-effectiveness analysis.
Nyári T; Nyári C; Woodward M; Mészáros G; Deák J; Nagy E; Kovács L
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2001 Apr; 80(4):300-6. PubMed ID: 11264602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Potentials of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in Hungary: cost-benefit analysis].
Nyári T; Mészáros G; Deák J; Nagy E; Kovács L
Orv Hetil; 2000 Jul; 141(27):1511-6. PubMed ID: 10943109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Should all sexually active young women in Hungary be screened for Chlamydia trachomatis?
Nyári T; Woodward M; Kovács L
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2003 Jan; 106(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 12475582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Epidemiological study of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in pregnant women in Hungary.
Nyári T; Deák J; Nagy E; Veréb I; Kovács L; Mészáros G; Orvos H; Berbik I
Sex Transm Infect; 1998 Jun; 74(3):213-5. PubMed ID: 9849559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens.
van Valkengoed IG; Postma MJ; Morré SA; van den Brule AJ; Meijer CJ; Bouter LM; Boeke AJ
Sex Transm Infect; 2001 Aug; 77(4):276-82. PubMed ID: 11463928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. [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]
8. Chlamydia trachomatis infection and the risk of perinatal mortality in Hungary.
Nyári T; Woodward M; Mészáros G; Karsai J; Kovács L
J Perinat Med; 2001; 29(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 11234618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Chlamydia trachomatis: impact on human reproduction.
Paavonen J; Eggert-Kruse W
Hum Reprod Update; 1999; 5(5):433-47. PubMed ID: 10582782
[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. [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]
12. Prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in a low-risk population in Hungary.
Deák J; Nagy E; Veréb I; Mészáros G; Kovács L; Nyári T; Berbik I
Sex Transm Dis; 1997 Oct; 24(9):538-42. PubMed ID: 9339973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cost-benefit analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in pregnant women in a high burden setting in the United States.
Ditkowsky J; Shah KH; Hammerschlag MR; Kohlhoff S; Smith-Norowitz TA
BMC Infect Dis; 2017 Feb; 17(1):155. PubMed ID: 28214469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Universal screening or prophylactic treatment for Chlamydia trachomatis infection among women seeking induced abortions: which strategy is more cost-effective?
Chen S; Li J; van den Hoek A
Sex Transm Dis; 2007 Apr; 34(4):230-6. PubMed ID: 17414068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in women 15 to 29 years of age: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Hu D; Hook EW; Goldie SJ
Ann Intern Med; 2004 Oct; 141(7):501-13. PubMed ID: 15466767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Health gains from screening for infection of the lower genital tract in women attending for termination of pregnancy.
Blackwell AL; Thomas PD; Wareham K; Emery SJ
Lancet; 1993 Jul; 342(8865):206-10. PubMed ID: 8100930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Screening for chlamydial infection.
Nelson HD; Helfand M
Am J Prev Med; 2001 Apr; 20(3 Suppl):95-107. PubMed ID: 11306238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An evaluation of economics and acceptability of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection, in women attending antenatal, abortion, colposcopy and family planning clinics in Scotland, UK.
Norman JE; Wu O; Twaddle S; Macmillan S; McMillan L; Templeton A; McKenzie H; Noone A; Allardice G; Reid M
BJOG; 2004 Nov; 111(11):1261-8. PubMed ID: 15521872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A cost-effectiveness analysis of screening and treatment for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in asymptomatic women.
Genç M; Mårdh A
Ann Intern Med; 1996 Jan; 124(1 Pt 1):1-7. PubMed ID: 7503471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
