BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15601485)

  • 1. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a pharmacy-based screening programme for Chlamydia trachomatis in a high-risk health centre population in Amsterdam using mailed home-collected urine samples.
    van Bergen JE; Postma MJ; Peerbooms PG; Spangenberg AC; Tjen-A-Tak J; Bindels PJ
    Int J STD AIDS; 2004 Dec; 15(12):797-802. PubMed ID: 15601485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis in sexually active population of Amsterdam. II. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening women].
    Ruitenberg EN
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 May; 143(19):1012. PubMed ID: 10368724
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. [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]  

  • 6. A Swedish cost-effectiveness analysis of community-based Chlamydia trachomatis PCR testing of postal urine specimens obtained at home.
    Novak DP; Lindholm L; Jonsson M; Karlsson RB
    Scand J Public Health; 2004; 32(5):324-32. PubMed ID: 15513664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis among the sexually active population in Amsterdam. III. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening women and the role of reinfection and partner treatment].
    Postma MJ; Welte R; van den Hoek JA; Jager JC; van Doornum GJ; Coutinho RA
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 Nov; 143(47):2383-5. PubMed ID: 10590778
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Epidemiological, social, diagnostic and economic evaluation of population screening for genital chlamydial infection.
    Low N; McCarthy A; Macleod J; Salisbury C; Campbell R; Roberts TE; Horner P; Skidmore S; Sterne JA; Sanford E; Ibrahim F; Holloway A; Patel R; Barton PM; Robinson SM; Mills N; Graham A; Herring A; Caul EO; Davey Smith G; Hobbs FD; Ross JD; Egger M;
    Health Technol Assess; 2007 Mar; 11(8):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-165. PubMed ID: 17311735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis among the sexually active population of Amsterdam. Il Over 90% participation and almost 5% prevalence].
    van den Hoek JA; Mulder-Folkerts DK; Coutinho RA; Dukers NH; Buimer M; van Doornum GJ
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 Mar; 143(13):668-72. PubMed ID: 10321299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cost-effectiveness of screening strategies for Chlamydia trachomatis using cervical swabs, urine, and self-obtained vaginal swabs in a sexually transmitted disease clinic setting.
    Blake DR; Maldeis N; Barnes MR; Hardick A; Quinn TC; Gaydos CA
    Sex Transm Dis; 2008 Jul; 35(7):649-55. PubMed ID: 18461013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Overestimation of complication rates in evaluations of Chlamydia trachomatis screening programmes--implications for cost-effectiveness analyses.
    van Valkengoed IG; Morré SA; van den Brule AJ; Meijer CJ; Bouter LM; Boeke AJ
    Int J Epidemiol; 2004 Apr; 33(2):416-25. PubMed ID: 15082651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in asymptomatic women attending family planning clinics. A cost-effectiveness analysis of three strategies.
    Howell MR; Quinn TC; Gaydos CA
    Ann Intern Med; 1998 Feb; 128(4):277-84. PubMed ID: 9471930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening adolescent males for Chlamydia on admission to detention.
    Blake DR; Gaydos CA; Quinn TC
    Sex Transm Dis; 2004 Feb; 31(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 14743071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.