797 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17244348)
1. Effect of an antepartum Pap smear on the coverage of a cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based prospective study.
Nygård M; Daltveit AK; Thoresen SO; Nygård JF
BMC Health Serv Res; 2007 Jan; 7():10. PubMed ID: 17244348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden.
Andrae B; Kemetli L; Sparén P; Silfverdal L; Strander B; Ryd W; Dillner J; Törnberg S
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 May; 100(9):622-9. PubMed ID: 18445828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Validity of self-reported Pap smear history in Norwegian women.
Klungsøyr O; Nygård M; Skare G; Eriksen T; Nygård JF
J Med Screen; 2009; 16(2):91-7. PubMed ID: 19564522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. High-grade cervical abnormalities and screening intervals in New South Wales, Australia.
Schindeler S; Morrell S; Zuo Y; Baker D
J Med Screen; 2008; 15(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 18416954
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Pap smear screening among urban Southwestern American Indian women.
Risendal B; DeZapien J; Fowler B; Papenfuss M; Giuliano A
Prev Med; 1999 Dec; 29(6 Pt 1):510-8. PubMed ID: 10600432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A quasi-randomized trial on the effectiveness of an invitation letter to improve participation in a setting of opportunistic screening for cervical cancer.
de Jonge E; Cloes E; Op de Beeck L; Adriaens B; Lousbergh D; Orye GG; Buntinx F
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2008 Jun; 17(3):238-42. PubMed ID: 18414195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of cervical cancer screening program at a rural community of South Africa.
Hoque M; Hoque E; Kader SB
East Afr J Public Health; 2008 Aug; 5(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 19024420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cytological screening for cervical cancer in the province of Limburg, Belgium.
Arbyn M; Van Nieuwenhuyse A; Bogers J; De Jonge E; De Beeck LO; Matheï C; Buntinx F
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2011 Jan; 20(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 20805755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Differences in screening history, tumour characteristics and survival between women with screen-detected versus not screen-detected cervical cancer in the east of The Netherlands, 1992-2001.
van der Aa MA; Schutter EM; Looijen-Salamon M; Martens JE; Siesling S
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2008 Aug; 139(2):204-9. PubMed ID: 18093720
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Are analyses of cytological cervix smears from young women more harmful than beneficial?].
Skjeldestad FE; Hagen B; Hagmar B; Iversen OE; Juvkam KH; Steen R; Thoresen S; Hareide B
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2007 Jun; 127(13):1782-5. PubMed ID: 17599128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The cervical cancer screening programme in Norway, 1992-2000: changes in Pap smear coverage and incidence of cervical cancer.
Nygård JF; Skare GB; Thoresen SØ
J Med Screen; 2002; 9(2):86-91. PubMed ID: 12133929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Papanicolaou smear screening of women with intellectual disabilities: a cross-sectional survey in Taiwan.
Lin LP; Lin JD; Sung CL; Liu TW; Liu YL; Chen LM; Chu CM
Res Dev Disabil; 2010; 31(2):403-9. PubMed ID: 19897337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Cervical cancer after 10 years of nationally coordinated screening].
Haldorsen T; Skare GB; Steen R; Thoresen SO
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2008 Mar; 128(6):682-5. PubMed ID: 18337847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Early detection of precursors of cervical cancer with cervical cytology and visual inspection of cervix with acetic Acid.
Dhaubhadel P; Vaidya A; Choudhary P
JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc; 2008; 47(170):71-6. PubMed ID: 18709035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cervical cancer in women with comprehensive health care access: attributable factors in the screening process.
Leyden WA; Manos MM; Geiger AM; Weinmann S; Mouchawar J; Bischoff K; Yood MU; Gilbert J; Taplin SH
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 May; 97(9):675-83. PubMed ID: 15870438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cervical cancer screening: A Slovenian experience.
Primic-Zakelj M; Repse-Fokter A
Coll Antropol; 2007 Apr; 31 Suppl 2():23-6. PubMed ID: 17600934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [The 1996 revision of the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: increased coverage, fewer repeat smears and less opportunistic screening].
Berkers LM; van Ballegooijen M; van Kemenade FJ; Rebolj M; Essink-Bot ML; Helmerhorst TJ; Habbema JD
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2007 Jun; 151(23):1288-94. PubMed ID: 17624160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A case-control study of the protective benefit of cervical screening against invasive cervical cancer in NSW women.
Yang B; Morrell S; Zuo Y; Roder D; Tracey E; Jelfs P
Cancer Causes Control; 2008 Aug; 19(6):569-76. PubMed ID: 18286380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The agreement between self-reported cervical smear abnormalities and screening programme records.
Canfell K; Beral V; Green J; Cameron R; Baker K; Brown A
J Med Screen; 2006; 13(2):72-5. PubMed ID: 16792828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Participation in the Dutch national screening programme for uterine cervic cancer higher after invitation by a general practitioner, especially in groups with a traditional low level of attendance].
de Nooijer DP; de Waart FG; van Leeuwen AW; Spijker WW
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2005 Oct; 149(42):2339-43. PubMed ID: 16261714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
