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 *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11872874)

  • 41. Is screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection cost effective?
    Paavonen J
    Genitourin Med; 1997 Apr; 73(2):103-4. PubMed ID: 9215090
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Sexuality and health: the hidden costs of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis.
    Duncan B; Hart G
    BMJ; 1999 Apr; 318(7188):931-3. PubMed ID: 10102865
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. 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]  

  • 44. Cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of published studies.
    Honey E; Augood C; Templeton A; Russell I; Paavonen J; Mårdh PA; Stary A; Stray-Pedersen B
    Sex Transm Infect; 2002 Dec; 78(6):406-12. PubMed ID: 12473799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. The program cost and cost-effectiveness of screening men for Chlamydia to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease in women.
    Gift TL; Gaydos CA; Kent CK; Marrazzo JM; Rietmeijer CA; Schillinger JA; Dunne EF
    Sex Transm Dis; 2008 Nov; 35(11 Suppl):S66-75. PubMed ID: 18830137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Cost-benefit analysis of first-void urine Chlamydia trachomatis screening program.
    Paavonen J; Puolakkainen M; Paukku M; Sintonen H
    Obstet Gynecol; 1998 Aug; 92(2):292-8. PubMed ID: 9699769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The cost effectiveness of opportunistic chlamydia screening in England.
    Adams EJ; Turner KM; Edmunds WJ
    Sex Transm Infect; 2007 Jul; 83(4):267-74; discussion 274-5. PubMed ID: 17475686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Cost-Effectiveness of Opt-Out Chlamydia Testing for High-Risk Young Women in the U.S.
    Owusu-Edusei K; Hoover KW; Gift TL
    Am J Prev Med; 2016 Aug; 51(2):216-224. PubMed ID: 26952078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. [Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection: which group should be targeted and at what price?].
    van Vloten WA
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 Mar; 143(13):652-3. PubMed ID: 10321294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. The utility and cost of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae screening of a male infertility population.
    Domes T; Lo KC; Grober ED; Mullen JB; Mazzulli T; Jarvi K
    Fertil Steril; 2012 Feb; 97(2):299-305. PubMed ID: 22192351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Modelling the impact of opportunistic screening on the sequelae and public healthcare costs of infection with Chlamydia trachomatis in Australian women.
    Ward B; Rodger AJ; Jackson TJ
    Public Health; 2006 Jan; 120(1):42-9. PubMed ID: 16271271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Health economic methodology illustrated with recent work on Chlamydia screening: the concept of extended dominance.
    Postma MJ; de Vries R; Welte R; Edmunds WJ
    Sex Transm Infect; 2008 Apr; 84(2):152-4. PubMed ID: 18077610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Urine gonococcal/Chlamydia testing in adolescents.
    Spigarelli MG
    Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol; 2006 Oct; 18(5):498-502. PubMed ID: 16932043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Healthcare and patient costs of a proactive chlamydia screening programme: the Chlamydia Screening Studies project.
    Robinson S; Roberts T; Barton P; Bryan S; Macleod J; McCarthy A; Egger M; Sanford E; Low N;
    Sex Transm Infect; 2007 Jul; 83(4):276-81. PubMed ID: 17229792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. The silent epidemic of Chlamydia: what are we missing here?
    Sanfilippo JS
    J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol; 2008 Oct; 21(5):231-2. PubMed ID: 18794016
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. The case for screening is made, but much detail remains to be worked out.
    Boag F; Kelly F
    BMJ; 1998 May; 316(7143):1474. PubMed ID: 9582128
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. The cost and cost-effectiveness of opportunistic screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in Ireland.
    Gillespie P; O'Neill C; Adams E; Turner K; O'Donovan D; Brugha R; Vaughan D; O'Connell E; Cormican M; Balfe M; Coleman C; Fitzgerald M; Fleming C
    Sex Transm Infect; 2012 Apr; 88(3):222-8. PubMed ID: 22213681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Screening for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infection in male students by examination of first catch urine.
    Berry J; Crowley T; Horner P; Clifford J; Paul ID; Caul EO
    Genitourin Med; 1995 Oct; 71(5):329-31. PubMed ID: 7490057
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Screening of Chlamydia trachomatis urogenital infections among the male and female population of the Republic of Macedonia.
    Spasovski MS; Simjanovska LJ; Taleski V; Petrova N; Lazetic L; Popeska Z; Gaydos CA; Quinn TC; Efremov GD
    J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol; 2005 Jul; 19(4):427-30. PubMed ID: 15987287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Screening programmes for chlamydial infection: when will we ever learn?
    Low N
    BMJ; 2007 Apr; 334(7596):725-8. PubMed ID: 17413173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.