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.
126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12546207)
1. The impact of a television soap opera on the NHS Cervical Screening Programme in the North West of England. Howe A; Owen-Smith V; Richardson J J Public Health Med; 2002 Dec; 24(4):299-304. PubMed ID: 12546207 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The effect of 'Alma's' death on women attending for a cervical smear: a questionnaire survey. Richardson J; Owen-Smith V; Howe A J Public Health Med; 2002 Dec; 24(4):305-6. PubMed ID: 12546208 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Television soap opera and the NHS Cervical Screening Programme: follow-up data. Owen-Smith V; Howe A; Richardson J J Public Health Med; 2003 Jun; 25(2):183. PubMed ID: 12848413 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Health authority cervical screening recall policies and time since last smear: a retrospective cohort analysis in the north west England. Howe A; Owen-Smith V; Richardson J J Med Screen; 2003; 10(4):184-8. PubMed ID: 14746327 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. An examination of the role of opportunistic smear taking in the NHS cervical screening programme using data from the CSEU cervical screening cohort study. Blanks RG; Moss SM; Coleman DA; Swerdlow AJ BJOG; 2007 Nov; 114(11):1408-13. PubMed ID: 17803716 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The cervical cancer screening programme in Norway, 1992-2000: changes in Pap smear coverage and incidence of cervical cancer. Nygård JF; Skare GB; Thoresen SØ J Med Screen; 2002; 9(2):86-91. PubMed ID: 12133929 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Improving uptake of cervical cancer screening in women with prolonged history of non-attendance for screening: a randomized trial of enhanced invitation methods. Stein K; Lewendon G; Jenkins R; Davis C J Med Screen; 2005; 12(4):185-9. PubMed ID: 16417695 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Using online adverts to increase the uptake of cervical screening amongst "real Eastenders": an opportunistic controlled trial. Jones RB; Soler-Lopez M; Zahra D; Shankleman J; Trenchard-Mabere E BMC Res Notes; 2013 Mar; 6():117. PubMed ID: 23531167 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A retrospective study of cervical screening in women under 25 years (2005-2009). Ali AA; Richardson D; Hill N Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2013 Apr; 287(4):765-9. PubMed ID: 23183714 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of nonscreening smears on screening smear results: a statistical analysis with its implications for the NHS cervical screening programme. Rice S; Slater DN; Hewer EM Cytopathology; 2000 Jun; 11(3):158-65. PubMed ID: 10877275 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Risk of cervical cancer after a negative Pap smear. Viikki M; Pukkala E; Hakama M J Med Screen; 1999; 6(2):103-7. PubMed ID: 10444730 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Pap smear usage in New South Wales--impact of active promotion. Young M; Trevan E Community Health Stud; 1990; 14(3):255-62. PubMed ID: 2253460 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A mobile unit: an effective service for cervical cancer screening among rural Thai women. Swaddiwudhipong W; Chaovakiratipong C; Nguntra P; Mahasakpan P; Tatip Y; Boonmak C Int J Epidemiol; 1999 Feb; 28(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 10195661 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Is a policy of cervical screening for all women attending a genito-urinary medicine clinic justified? Stedman Y; Woodman CB; Donnelly BJ J Public Health Med; 1995 Mar; 17(1):90-2. PubMed ID: 7786575 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Impact of media reporting of cervical cancer in a UK celebrity on a population-based cervical screening programme. MacArthur GJ; Wright M; Beer H; Paranjothy S J Med Screen; 2011; 18(4):204-9. PubMed ID: 22156146 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cervical smears--an opportunity for disinvestment? Spence MT; Woodman C; Collins S; Donnelly B; Desai M Br J Gen Pract; 1996 Sep; 46(410):537-8. PubMed ID: 8917874 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The agreement between self-reported cervical smear abnormalities and screening programme records. Canfell K; Beral V; Green J; Cameron R; Baker K; Brown A J Med Screen; 2006; 13(2):72-5. PubMed ID: 16792828 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [The 1996 revision of the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: increased coverage, fewer repeat smears and less opportunistic screening]. Berkers LM; van Ballegooijen M; van Kemenade FJ; Rebolj M; Essink-Bot ML; Helmerhorst TJ; Habbema JD Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2007 Jun; 151(23):1288-94. PubMed ID: 17624160 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Randomised controlled trial of the effect of evidence based information on women's willingness to participate in cervical cancer screening. Adab P; Marshall T; Rouse A; Randhawa B; Sangha H; Bhangoo N J Epidemiol Community Health; 2003 Aug; 57(8):589-93. PubMed ID: 12883063 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effect of a mobile unit on changes in knowledge and use of cervical cancer screening among rural Thai women. Swaddiwudhipong W; Chaovakiratipong C; Nguntra P; Mahasakpan P; Lerdlukanavonge P; Koonchote S Int J Epidemiol; 1995 Jun; 24(3):493-8. PubMed ID: 7672887 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]