134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16572038)
41. Should asymptomatic patients be tested for Chlamydia trachomatis in general practice?
Buhaug H; Skjeldestad FE; Halvorsen LE; Dalen A
Br J Gen Pract; 1990 Apr; 40(333):142-5. PubMed ID: 2115349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Cost effectiveness of home based population screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in the UK: economic evaluation of chlamydia screening studies (ClaSS) project.
Roberts TE; Robinson S; Barton PM; Bryan S; McCarthy A; Macleod J; Egger M; Low N
BMJ; 2007 Aug; 335(7614):291. PubMed ID: 17656504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Chlamydia sequelae cost estimates used in current economic evaluations: does one-size-fit-all?
Ong KJ; Soldan K; Jit M; Dunbar JK; Woodhall SC
Sex Transm Infect; 2017 Feb; 93(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 27288417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. The cost-effectiveness of screening men for Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of the literature.
Gift TL; Blake DR; Gaydos CA; Marrazzo JM
Sex Transm Dis; 2008 Nov; 35(11 Suppl):S51-60. PubMed ID: 18520977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Chlamydia screening for pregnant women aged 16-25 years attending an antenatal service: a cost-effectiveness study.
Ong JJ; Chen M; Hocking J; Fairley CK; Carter R; Bulfone L; Hsueh A
BJOG; 2016 Jun; 123(7):1194-202. PubMed ID: 26307516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Time from sexually transmitted infection acquisition to pelvic inflammatory disease development: influence on the cost-effectiveness of different screening intervals.
Smith KJ; Cook RL; Roberts MS
Value Health; 2007; 10(5):358-66. PubMed ID: 17888100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of published studies.
Honey E; Augood C; Templeton A; Russell I; Paavonen J; Mårdh PA; Stary A; Stray-Pedersen B
Sex Transm Infect; 2002 Dec; 78(6):406-12. PubMed ID: 12473799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. The cost effectiveness of screening for genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Australia.
Walleser S; Salkeld G; Donovan B
Sex Health; 2006 Dec; 3(4):225-34. PubMed ID: 17112432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Sample size considerations using mathematical models: an example with Chlamydia trachomatis infection and its sequelae pelvic inflammatory disease.
Herzog SA; Low N; Berghold A
BMC Infect Dis; 2015 Jun; 15():233. PubMed ID: 26084755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Cost-Effectiveness of Opt-Out Chlamydia Testing for High-Risk Young Women in the U.S.
Owusu-Edusei K; Hoover KW; Gift TL
Am J Prev Med; 2016 Aug; 51(2):216-224. PubMed ID: 26952078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Should all sexually active young women in Hungary be screened for Chlamydia trachomatis?
Nyári T; Woodward M; Kovács L
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2003 Jan; 106(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 12475582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Cost-effectiveness of widespread screening for Chlamydia trachomatis.
Postma MJ; Welte R; Morré SA
Expert Opin Pharmacother; 2002 Oct; 3(10):1443-50. PubMed ID: 12387690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Screening programmes for chlamydial infection: when will we ever learn?
Low N
BMJ; 2007 Apr; 334(7596):725-8. PubMed ID: 17413173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Benefit of adjunct universal rectal screening for Chlamydia genital infections in women attending Canadian sexually transmitted infection clinics.
Thanh NX; Akpinar I; Gratrix J; Plitt S; Smyczek P; Read R; Jacobs P; Wong T; Singh AE
Int J STD AIDS; 2017 Nov; 28(13):1311-1324. PubMed ID: 28534712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Summaries for patients. The cost-effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia in women 15 to 29 years of age.
Ann Intern Med; 2004 Oct; 141(7):I29. PubMed ID: 15466762
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. Health economic methodology illustrated with recent work on Chlamydia screening: the concept of extended dominance.
Postma MJ; de Vries R; Welte R; Edmunds WJ
Sex Transm Infect; 2008 Apr; 84(2):152-4. PubMed ID: 18077610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Costs and effects of chlamydial screening: dynamic versus static modeling.
Welte R; Postma M; Leidl R; Kretzschmar M
Sex Transm Dis; 2005 Aug; 32(8):474-83. PubMed ID: 16041248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. The cost effectiveness of azithromycin for Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women.
Haddix AC; Hillis SD; Kassler WJ
Sex Transm Dis; 1995; 22(5):274-80. PubMed ID: 7502180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Cost-effectiveness of Chlamydia vaccination programs for young women.
Owusu-Edusei K; Chesson HW; Gift TL; Brunham RC; Bolan G
Emerg Infect Dis; 2015 Jun; 21(6):960-8. PubMed ID: 25989525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women.
Gupta M; Hernon M; Gokhale R; Ghosh AK
Sex Transm Infect; 2002 Feb; 78(1):76. PubMed ID: 11872877
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
