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 *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16386924)

  • 41. The association between socioeconomic status of high-risk patients with coronary heart disease and the treatment rates of evidence-based medicine for coronary heart disease secondary prevention in China: Results from the Bridging the Gap on CHD Secondary Prevention in China (BRIG) Project.
    Niu S; Zhao D; Zhu J; Liu J; Liu Q; Liu J; Wang W; Smith SC;
    Am Heart J; 2009 Apr; 157(4):709-15.e1. PubMed ID: 19332200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. An international comparison of cancer survival: Toronto, Ontario, and Detroit, Michigan, metropolitan areas.
    Gorey KM; Holowaty EJ; Fehringer G; Laukkanen E; Moskowitz A; Webster DJ; Richter NL
    Am J Public Health; 1997 Jul; 87(7):1156-63. PubMed ID: 9240106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Breast cancer survival in ontario and california, 1998-2006: socioeconomic inequity remains much greater in the United States.
    Gorey KM; Luginaah IN; Holowaty EJ; Fung KY; Hamm C
    Ann Epidemiol; 2009 Feb; 19(2):121-4. PubMed ID: 19185806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Census-Tract-Level Median Household Income and Median Family Income Estimates: A Unidimensional Measure of Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status?
    Oka M
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2022 Dec; 20(1):. PubMed ID: 36612534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Detecting survival effects of socioeconomic status: problems in the use of aggregate measures.
    Greenwald HP; Polissar NL; Borgatta EF; McCorkle R
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1994 Aug; 47(8):903-9. PubMed ID: 7730894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Using Principal Component Analysis to Identify Priority Neighbourhoods for Health Services Delivery by Ranking Socioeconomic Status.
    Friesen CE; Seliske P; Papadopoulos A
    Online J Public Health Inform; 2016; 8(2):e192. PubMed ID: 27752298
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Regarding "Associations between socioeconomic status and cancer survival".
    Gorey KM
    Ann Epidemiol; 2006 Oct; 16(10):789-91; author reply 792-3. PubMed ID: 16882472
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Socioeconomic differences in cancer survival: the Norwegian Women and Cancer Study.
    Braaten T; Weiderpass E; Lund E
    BMC Public Health; 2009 Jun; 9():178. PubMed ID: 19505303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Effects of socioeconomic status on colon cancer treatment accessibility and survival in Toronto, Ontario, and San Francisco, California, 1996-2006.
    Gorey KM; Luginaah IN; Bartfay E; Fung KY; Holowaty EJ; Wright FC; Hamm C; Kanjeekal SM
    Am J Public Health; 2011 Jan; 101(1):112-9. PubMed ID: 20299655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Is cancer survival poorer in Louisiana?
    Chen VW; Correa P; Craig JF; Fontham ET
    J La State Med Soc; 1988 Apr; 140(4):20-8. PubMed ID: 3373191
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. [International variations of the survival of cancer patients. Comparison between USA and Canada].
    Krasnik A
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1997 Oct; 159(44):6533-4. PubMed ID: 9411976
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Ecologic proxies for household income: how well do they work for the analysis of health and health care utilization?
    Finkelstein MM
    Can J Public Health; 2004; 95(2):90-4. PubMed ID: 15074896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Are there socioeconomic gradients in the quality of data held by UK cancer registries?
    Adams J; White M; Forman D
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 2004 Dec; 58(12):1052-4. PubMed ID: 15547072
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Issues in comparing survival rates for Detroit and Toronto.
    Weiss LK; Severson RK; Swanson GM
    Am J Public Health; 1998 Oct; 88(10):1556-7. PubMed ID: 9772863
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. An international comparison of cancer survival: advantage of Toronto's poor over the near poor of Detroit.
    Gorey KM; Holowaty EJ; Laukkanen E; Fehringer G; Richter NL
    Can J Public Health; 1998; 89(2):102-4. PubMed ID: 9583250
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Effects of socioeconomic status on cancer patient survival: counterfactual event-based mediation analysis.
    Lin SW; Anisa KN
    Cancer Causes Control; 2021 Jan; 32(1):83-93. PubMed ID: 33211220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Misclassification of income quintiles derived from area-based measures. A comparison of enumeration area and forward sortation area.
    Southern DA; Ghali WA; Faris PD; Norris CM; Galbraith PD; Graham MM; Knudtson ML;
    Can J Public Health; 2002; 93(6):465-9. PubMed ID: 12448873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. The effect of socioeconomic status on the long-term outcome of cancer.
    Stavraky KM; Skillings JR; Stitt LW; Gwadry-Sridhar F
    J Clin Epidemiol; 1996 Oct; 49(10):1155-60. PubMed ID: 8826996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Socioeconomic status versus survival in Ontario.
    Stewart DJ
    J Clin Oncol; 1997 Dec; 15(12):3517. PubMed ID: 9396406
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Danish study links cancer survival to income and education.
    Dobson R
    BMJ; 2008 Aug; 337():a1340. PubMed ID: 18715983
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.