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.
181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15682286)
41. Cost-effectiveness of HPV-based cervical screening based on first year results in the Netherlands: a modelling study. Jansen E; Naber SK; Aitken CA; de Koning HJ; van Ballegooijen M; de Kok I BJOG; 2021 Feb; 128(3):573-582. PubMed ID: 32638462 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. An evaluation of liquid-based cytology and human papillomavirus testing within the UK cervical cancer screening programme. Sherlaw-Johnson C; Philips Z Br J Cancer; 2004 Jul; 91(1):84-91. PubMed ID: 15162150 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Cost-effectiveness of 21 alternative cervical cancer screening strategies. Chuck A Value Health; 2010; 13(2):169-79. PubMed ID: 19804436 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Cost-effectiveness of increasing cervical cancer screening coverage in the Middle East: An example from Lebanon. Sharma M; Seoud M; Kim JJ Vaccine; 2017 Jan; 35(4):564-569. PubMed ID: 28017434 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with primary human papillomavirus testing in Norway. Burger EA; Ortendahl JD; Sy S; Kristiansen IS; Kim JJ Br J Cancer; 2012 Apr; 106(9):1571-8. PubMed ID: 22441643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Cost-effectiveness of primarily human papillomavirus-based cervical cancer screening in settings with currently established Pap screening: a systematic review commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Health. Mühlberger N; Sroczynski G; Esteban E; Mittendorf T; Miksad RA; Siebert U Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2008; 24(2):184-92. PubMed ID: 18400122 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Comparative models of cervical cancer screening in Manitoba. DeRiviere L; Stopera S; Caeseele PV; Lotocki R Healthc Q; 2013; 16(1):77-85. PubMed ID: 24863312 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Policy analysis of cervical cancer screening strategies in low-resource settings: clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness. Goldie SJ; Kuhn L; Denny L; Pollack A; Wright TC JAMA; 2001 Jun; 285(24):3107-15. PubMed ID: 11427139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Overview of the European and North American studies on HPV testing in primary cervical cancer screening. Cuzick J; Clavel C; Petry KU; Meijer CJ; Hoyer H; Ratnam S; Szarewski A; Birembaut P; Kulasingam S; Sasieni P; Iftner T Int J Cancer; 2006 Sep; 119(5):1095-101. PubMed ID: 16586444 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Primary screening for human papillomavirus compared with cytology screening for cervical cancer in European settings: cost effectiveness analysis based on a Dutch microsimulation model. de Kok IM; van Rosmalen J; Dillner J; Arbyn M; Sasieni P; Iftner T; van Ballegooijen M BMJ; 2012 Mar; 344():e670. PubMed ID: 22391612 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Cost-effective management of women with minor cervical lesions: Revisiting the application of HPV DNA testing. Pedersen K; Burger EA; Sy S; Kristiansen IS; Kim JJ Gynecol Oncol; 2016 Nov; 143(2):326-333. PubMed ID: 27542966 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Cost-Effectiveness of Different Cervical Screening Strategies in Islamic Republic of Iran: A Middle-Income Country with a Low Incidence Rate of Cervical Cancer. Nahvijou A; Daroudi R; Tahmasebi M; Amouzegar Hashemi F; Rezaei Hemami M; Akbari Sari A; Barati Marenani A; Zendehdel K PLoS One; 2016; 11(6):e0156705. PubMed ID: 27276093 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Lifetime effects, costs, and cost effectiveness of testing for human papillomavirus to manage low grade cytological abnormalities: results of the NHS pilot studies. Legood R; Gray A; Wolstenholme J; Moss S BMJ; 2006 Jan; 332(7533):79-85. PubMed ID: 16399769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Is the HPV-test more cost-effective than cytology in cervical cancer screening? An economic analysis from a middle-income country. Vale DB; Silva MT; Discacciati MG; Polegatto I; Teixeira JC; Zeferino LC PLoS One; 2021; 16(5):e0251688. PubMed ID: 33989331 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with primary HPV testing for unvaccinated women in Sweden. Fogelberg S; Clements MS; Pedersen K; Sy S; Sparén P; Kim JJ; Burger EA PLoS One; 2020; 15(9):e0239611. PubMed ID: 32997696 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. The Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Self-Sampling to Improve Routine Cervical Cancer Screening: The Importance of Respondent Screening History and Compliance. Burger EA; Sy S; Nygård M; Kim JJ Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2017 Jan; 26(1):95-103. PubMed ID: 27624639 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Switching clinic-based cervical cancer screening programs to human papillomavirus self-sampling: A cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccinated and unvaccinated Norwegian women. Pedersen K; Portnoy A; Sy S; Hansen BT; Tropé A; Kim JJ; Burger EA Int J Cancer; 2022 Feb; 150(3):491-501. PubMed ID: 34664271 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Long-term costs of introducing HPV-DNA post-treatment surveillance to national cervical cancer screening in Ireland. Agapova M; Duignan A; Smith A; O'Neill C; Basu A Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2015; 15(6):999-1005. PubMed ID: 26377838 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Estimated Quality of Life and Economic Outcomes Associated With 12 Cervical Cancer Screening Strategies: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis. Sawaya GF; Sanstead E; Alarid-Escudero F; Smith-McCune K; Gregorich SE; Silverberg MJ; Leyden W; Huchko MJ; Kuppermann M; Kulasingam S JAMA Intern Med; 2019 Jul; 179(7):867-878. PubMed ID: 31081851 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]