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 *

307 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16962910)

  • 21. How do women who choose not to participate in population-based cervical cancer screening reason about their decision?
    Blomberg K; Ternestedt BM; Törnberg S; Tishelman C
    Psychooncology; 2008 Jun; 17(6):561-9. PubMed ID: 17886262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Research in action: mammography utilization following breast cancer awareness campaigns in Lebanon 2002-05.
    Adib SM; Sabbah MA; Hlais S; Hanna P
    East Mediterr Health J; 2009; 15(1):6-18. PubMed ID: 19469422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Are women getting relevant information about mammography screening for an informed consent: a critical appraisal of information brochures used for screening invitation in Germany, Italy, Spain and France.
    Gummersbach E; Piccoliori G; Zerbe CO; Altiner A; Othman C; Rose C; Abholz HH
    Eur J Public Health; 2010 Aug; 20(4):409-14. PubMed ID: 19892852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [What kind of information do German health information pamphlets provide on mammography screening?].
    Kurzenhäuser S
    Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2003 Feb; 97(1):53-7. PubMed ID: 12669690
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Modeling the decision to undergo colorectal cancer screening: insights on patient preventive decision making.
    Wackerbarth SB; Peters JC; Haist SA
    Med Care; 2008 Sep; 46(9 Suppl 1):S17-22. PubMed ID: 18725828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Helping women make choices about mammography screening: an online randomized trial of a decision aid for 40-year-old women.
    Mathieu E; Barratt AL; McGeechan K; Davey HM; Howard K; Houssami N
    Patient Educ Couns; 2010 Oct; 81(1):63-72. PubMed ID: 20149953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Are benefits and harms in mammography screening given equal attention in scientific articles? A cross-sectional study.
    Jørgensen KJ; Klahn A; Gøtzsche PC
    BMC Med; 2007 May; 5():12. PubMed ID: 17537243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Older women's breast screening behaviors: what nurses need to know.
    Koren ME; Hertz JE
    Medsurg Nurs; 2007 Apr; 16(2):80-5; quiz 86. PubMed ID: 17547264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Improving the quality of communication in organised cervical cancer screening programmes.
    Giordano L; Webster P; Anthony C; Szarewski A; Davies P; Arbyn M; Segnan N; Austoker J
    Patient Educ Couns; 2008 Jul; 72(1):130-6. PubMed ID: 18538725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparison of factors affecting repeat mammography screening of low-income Mexican American women.
    Lopez-McKee G; McNeill JA; Bader J; Morales P
    Oncol Nurs Forum; 2008 Nov; 35(6):941-7. PubMed ID: 18980925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Women's mammography experience and its impact on screening adherence.
    Tang TS; Patterson SK; Roubidoux MA; Duan L
    Psychooncology; 2009 Jul; 18(7):727-34. PubMed ID: 19035468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Low priority main reason not to participate in a colorectal cancer screening program with a faecal occult blood test.
    van Rijn AF; van Rossum LG; Deutekom M; Laheij RJ; Fockens P; Bossuyt PM; Dekker E; Jansen JB
    J Public Health (Oxf); 2008 Dec; 30(4):461-5. PubMed ID: 18716047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A perspective from countries using organized screening programs.
    Miles A; Cockburn J; Smith RA; Wardle J
    Cancer; 2004 Sep; 101(5 Suppl):1201-13. PubMed ID: 15316915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Concise evaluation of decision aids.
    Stalmeier PF; Roosmalen MS
    Patient Educ Couns; 2009 Jan; 74(1):104-9. PubMed ID: 18775622
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A theoretical framework for measuring knowledge in screening decision aid trials.
    Smith SK; Barratt A; Trevena L; Simpson JM; Jansen J; McCaffery KJ
    Patient Educ Couns; 2012 Nov; 89(2):330-6. PubMed ID: 22871477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Psychological consequences of breast cancer screening among healthy women].
    von Bülow B
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2000 Feb; 162(8):1053-9. PubMed ID: 10741242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Are women with functional limitations at high risk of underutilization of mammography screening?
    Ahmed NU; Smith GL; Haber G; Belcon MC
    Womens Health Issues; 2009; 19(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 19111790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Effects of a tailored interactive multimedia computer program on determinants of colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled pilot study in physician offices.
    Jerant A; Kravitz RL; Rooney M; Amerson S; Kreuter M; Franks P
    Patient Educ Couns; 2007 Apr; 66(1):67-74. PubMed ID: 17156968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.
    Bekkering GE; Kleijnen J
    Eur J Health Econ; 2008 Nov; 9 Suppl 1():5-29. PubMed ID: 18987905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Association of contextual factors and breast cancer screening: finding new targets to promote early detection.
    Litaker D; Tomolo A
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2007; 16(1):36-45. PubMed ID: 17324095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.