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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11495380)

  • 1. Health technology assessment and screening in The Netherlands: case studies of mammography in breast cancer, PSA screening in prostate cancer, and ultrasound in normal pregnancy.
    Banta HD; Oortwiin W
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):369-79. PubMed ID: 11495380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evidence-based screening in the United Kingdom.
    Gray JA
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):400-8. PubMed ID: 11495383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Health technology assessment in the area of prevention: selected screening cases in Greece.
    Mousiama T; Loakimidou S; Largatzi E; Kaitelidou D; Liaropoulus L
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):338-57. PubMed ID: 11495378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Health technology assessment and screening in Sweden.
    Jonsson E; Banta HD; Schersten T
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):380-8. PubMed ID: 11495381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Impact of health technology assessment on preventive screening in Belgium: case studies of mammography in breast cancer, PSA screening in prostate cancer, and ultrasound in normal pregnancy.
    Vermeulen V; Coppens K; Kesteloot K
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):316-28. PubMed ID: 11495376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluation of preventive technologies in Germany: case studies of mammography, prostate cancer screening, and fetal ultrasound.
    Perleth M; Busse R; Gibis B; Brand A
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):329-37. PubMed ID: 11495377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Health technology assessment of three screening methods in Switzerland.
    Faisst K; Schilling J; Koch P
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):389-99. PubMed ID: 11495382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Health policy, health technology assessment, and screening in Europe.
    Banta HD
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):409-17. PubMed ID: 11495384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mammography, routine ultrasonography in pregnancy, and PSA screenings in Italy.
    Favaretti C; De Pieri P
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):358-68. PubMed ID: 11495379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Screening in Austria: the cases of mammography, PSA testing, and routine use of ultrasound in pregnancy.
    Wild C
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):305-15. PubMed ID: 11495375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The accuracy and effectiveness of routine population screening with mammography, prostate-specific antigen, and prenatal ultrasound: a review of published scientific evidence.
    Woolf SH
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):275-304. PubMed ID: 11495374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Introduction: mass screening, health technology assessment, and health policy in some European countries.
    Oortwijn W; Banta HD; Cranovsky R
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2001; 17(3):269-74. PubMed ID: 11495373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Colorectal cancer screening participation: comparisons with mammography and prostate-specific antigen screening.
    Lemon S; Zapka J; Puleo E; Luckmann R; Chasan-Taber L
    Am J Public Health; 2001 Aug; 91(8):1264-72. PubMed ID: 11499116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Public knowledge of benefits of breast and prostate cancer screening in Europe.
    Gigerenzer G; Mata J; Frank R
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Sep; 101(17):1216-20. PubMed ID: 19671770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Awareness and uptake of colorectal, breast, cervical and prostate cancer screening tests in Spain.
    Carrasco-Garrido P; Hernandez-Barrera V; Lopez de Andres A; Jimenez-Trujillo I; Gallardo Pino C; Jimenez-Garcıa R
    Eur J Public Health; 2014 Apr; 24(2):264-70. PubMed ID: 23813710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Implications of false-positive results for future cancer screenings.
    Taksler GB; Keating NL; Rothberg MB
    Cancer; 2018 Jun; 124(11):2390-2398. PubMed ID: 29682740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Association Between Online Information-Seeking and Adherence to Guidelines for Breast and Prostate Cancer Screening.
    Kim H; Filson C; Joski P; von Esenwein S; Lipscomb J
    Prev Chronic Dis; 2018 Apr; 15():E45. PubMed ID: 29679480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Patterns of cancer screening in primary care from 2005 to 2010.
    Martires KJ; Kurlander DE; Minwell GJ; Dahms EB; Bordeaux JS
    Cancer; 2014 Jan; 120(2):253-61. PubMed ID: 24166081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Are there regional tendencies toward controversial screening practices? A study of prostate and breast cancer screening in a Medicare population.
    Raffin E; Onega T; Bynum J; Austin A; Carmichael D; Bronner K; Goodney P; Hyams ES
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2017 Oct; 50(Pt A):68-75. PubMed ID: 28822325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Debating the desirability of new biomedical technologies: lessons from the introduction of breast cancer screening in the Netherlands.
    Boenink M
    Health Care Anal; 2012 Mar; 20(1):84-102. PubMed ID: 21499812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.