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 *

147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12387690)

  • 21. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis Infections in Women.
    Wiesenfeld HC
    N Engl J Med; 2017 Feb; 376(8):765-773. PubMed ID: 28225683
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Chlamydia sequelae cost estimates used in current economic evaluations: does one-size-fit-all?
    Ong KJ; Soldan K; Jit M; Dunbar JK; Woodhall SC
    Sex Transm Infect; 2017 Feb; 93(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 27288417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Female genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection: where are we heading?
    Mylonas I
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2012 May; 285(5):1271-85. PubMed ID: 22350326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Costs and effects of chlamydial screening: dynamic versus static modeling.
    Welte R; Postma M; Leidl R; Kretzschmar M
    Sex Transm Dis; 2005 Aug; 32(8):474-83. PubMed ID: 16041248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Cost-utility of repeated screening for Chlamydia trachomatis.
    de Vries R; van Bergen JE; de Jong-van den Berg LT; Postma MJ;
    Value Health; 2008; 11(2):272-4. PubMed ID: 18380639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Chlamydia screening is not cost-effective at low participation rates: evidence from a repeated register-based implementation study in The Netherlands.
    de Wit GA; Over EA; Schmid BV; van Bergen JE; van den Broek IV; van der Sande MA; Welte R; Op de Coul EL; Kretzschmar ME
    Sex Transm Infect; 2015 Sep; 91(6):423-9. PubMed ID: 25759475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Cost effectiveness of home based population screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in the UK: economic evaluation of chlamydia screening studies (ClaSS) project.
    Roberts TE; Robinson S; Barton PM; Bryan S; McCarthy A; Macleod J; Egger M; Low N
    BMJ; 2007 Aug; 335(7614):291. PubMed ID: 17656504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Chlamydia trachomatis screening in family planning centers: a review of cost/benefit evaluations in different countries.
    Henry-Suchet J; Sluzhinska A; Serfaty D
    Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care; 1996 Dec; 1(4):301-9. PubMed ID: 9678112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Cost-benefit analysis of selective screening criteria for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women attending Colorado family planning clinics.
    Humphreys JT; Henneberry JF; Rickard RS; Beebe JL
    Sex Transm Dis; 1992; 19(1):47-53. PubMed ID: 1561588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Control of Chlamydia trachomatis infections in female army recruits: cost-effective screening and treatment in training cohorts to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease.
    Howell MR; Gaydos JC; McKee KT; Quinn TC; Gaydos CA
    Sex Transm Dis; 1999 Oct; 26(9):519-26. PubMed ID: 10534206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Chlamydia trachomatis: common misperceptions and misunderstandings.
    Stevens-Simon C; Sheeder J
    J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol; 2005 Aug; 18(4):231-43. PubMed ID: 16171726
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Health and cost-benefits of chlamydia screening in young women.
    Mangione-Smith R; O'Leary J; McGlynn EA
    Sex Transm Dis; 1999 Jul; 26(6):309-16. PubMed ID: 10417017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Estimation of the burden of disease and costs of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Canada.
    Tuite AR; Jayaraman GC; Allen VG; Fisman DN
    Sex Transm Dis; 2012 Apr; 39(4):260-7. PubMed ID: 22421691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Is Europe ready for STD screening?
    Mårdh PA
    Genitourin Med; 1997 Apr; 73(2):96-8. PubMed ID: 9215088
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Chlamydia trachomatis infection among women 26 to 39 years of age in the United States, 1999 to 2010.
    Torrone EA; Geisler WM; Gift TL; Weinstock HS
    Sex Transm Dis; 2013 Apr; 40(4):335-7. PubMed ID: 23486500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.