52 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15637677)
1. A cost-effectiveness analysis of four management strategies in the determination and follow-up of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance.
Hughes AA; Glazner J; Barton P; Shlay JC
Diagn Cytopathol; 2005 Feb; 32(2):125-32. PubMed ID: 15637677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cost-effectiveness analysis of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing in cervical cancer screening.
Bidus MA; Maxwell GL; Kulasingam S; Rose GS; Elkas JC; Chernofsky M; Myers ER
Obstet Gynecol; 2006 May; 107(5):997-1005. PubMed ID: 16648402
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost-effectiveness of adding human papilloma virus testing to a managed care cervical cancer screening program.
Lonky NM; Hunter MI; Sadeghi M; Edwards G; Bajamundi K; Monk BJ
J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2007 Oct; 11(4):258-64. PubMed ID: 17917570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cytologic diagnosis of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women: lessons learned from human Papillomavirus DNA testing.
Johnston EI; Logani S
Cancer; 2007 Jun; 111(3):160-5. PubMed ID: 17506090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. HPV triage testing or repeat Pap smear for the management of atypical squamous cells (ASCUS) on Pap smear: is there evidence of process utility?
Howard K; Salkeld G; McCaffery K; Irwig L
Health Econ; 2008 May; 17(5):593-605. PubMed ID: 17764095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. HPV DNA testing in the triage of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS): cost comparison of two methods.
Layfield LJ; Qureshi MN
Diagn Cytopathol; 2005 Aug; 33(2):138-43. PubMed ID: 16007672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The health and economic impact of cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus vaccination in kidney transplant recipients.
Wong G; Howard K; Webster A; Chapman JR; Craig JC
Transplantation; 2009 Apr; 87(7):1078-91. PubMed ID: 19352131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The role of HPV testing in patients with possible high-grade cervical cytology.
Rao A; Pather S; Dalrymple C; Mackie A; Deans R; Carter J
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2009 Jun; 35(3):503-6. PubMed ID: 19527390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening: recommendations for clinical management of abnormal cervical cytology, part 1.
Jordan J; Arbyn M; Martin-Hirsch P; Schenck U; Baldauf JJ; Da Silva D; Anttila A; Nieminen P; Prendiville W
Cytopathology; 2008 Dec; 19(6):342-54. PubMed ID: 19040546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of p16INK4a as a diagnostic tool in the triage of Pap smears demonstrating atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance.
Duncan L; Jacob S; Hubbard E
Cancer; 2008 Feb; 114(1):34-48. PubMed ID: 18186493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Chapter 9: Clinical applications of HPV testing: a summary of meta-analyses.
Arbyn M; Sasieni P; Meijer CJ; Clavel C; Koliopoulos G; Dillner J
Vaccine; 2006 Aug; 24 Suppl 3():S3/78-89. PubMed ID: 16950021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Oncogenic human papillomavirus testing in an adolescent population with atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance.
Fletcher AH; Wilkinson EJ; Knapik JA
J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2009 Jan; 13(1):28-32. PubMed ID: 19098603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Impact of the more restrictive definition of atypical squamous cells introduced by the 2001 Bethesda System on the sensitivity and specificity of the Papanicolaou test: a 5-year follow-up study of Papanicolaou tests originally interpreted as ASCUS, reclassified according to Bethesda 2001 criteria.
Thrall MJ; Pambuccian SE; Stelow EB; McKeon DM; Miller L; Savik K; Gulbahce HE
Cancer; 2008 Jun; 114(3):171-9. PubMed ID: 18454461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Management of women with abnormal cervical cytology: treatment patterns and associated costs in England and Wales.
Martin-Hirsch P; Rash B; Martin A; Standaert B
BJOG; 2007 Apr; 114(4):408-15. PubMed ID: 17378815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The New Technologies for Cervical Cancer Screening randomised controlled trial. An overview of results during the first phase of recruitment.
Ronco G; Brezzi S; Carozzi F; Dalla Palma P; Giorgi-Rossi P; Minucci D; Naldoni C; Segnan N; Zappa M; Zorzi M; Cuzick J;
Gynecol Oncol; 2007 Oct; 107(1 Suppl 1):S230-2. PubMed ID: 17822751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Human papillomavirus (HPV) test and PAP smear as predictors of outcome in conservatively treated adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) of the uterine cervix.
Costa S; Negri G; Sideri M; Santini D; Martinelli G; Venturoli S; Pelusi C; Syrjanen S; Syrjanen K; Pelusi G
Gynecol Oncol; 2007 Jul; 106(1):170-6. PubMed ID: 17481701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Willingness to pay for new Papanicolaou test technologies.
Raab SS; Grzybicki DM; Hart AR; Kiely S; Andrew-JaJa C; Scioscia E
Am J Clin Pathol; 2002 Apr; 117(4):524-33. PubMed ID: 11939725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Endocervical brush versus cotton swab for obtaining cervical smears at a clinic. A cost comparison.
Harrison DD; Hernandez E; Dunton CJ
J Reprod Med; 1993 Apr; 38(4):285-8. PubMed ID: 8501736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A new era for the Pap test.
Holladay EB; Allen KA
JAAPA; 2001 Dec; 14(12):53-6. PubMed ID: 11824091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A cost-effectiveness analysis of rapid yeast detection kits.
Gaur SK; Frick KD; Dandolu V
Womens Health Issues; 2010; 20(1):75-9. PubMed ID: 19944622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
