176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17308266)
21. Comparative economic evaluation of data from the ACRIN National CT Colonography Trial with three cancer intervention and surveillance modeling network microsimulations.
Vanness DJ; Knudsen AB; Lansdorp-Vogelaar I; Rutter CM; Gareen IF; Herman BA; Kuntz KM; Zauber AG; van Ballegooijen M; Feuer EJ; Chen MH; Johnson CD
Radiology; 2011 Nov; 261(2):487-98. PubMed ID: 21813740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Who receives, benefits from and is harmed by cervical and breast cancer screening among Hong Kong Chinese?
Leung GM; Woo PP; Cowling BJ; Tsang CS; Cheung AN; Ngan HY; Galbraith K; Lam TH
J Public Health (Oxf); 2008 Sep; 30(3):282-92. PubMed ID: 18482996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Prevention of cervical cancer with screening programme in Branicevo District and cost-effectiveness analysis adjusted to the territory of the Republic of Serbia.
Perovic S
J BUON; 2009; 14(1):93-6. PubMed ID: 19373953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic colonography screening for colorectal cancer in the medicare population.
Knudsen AB; Lansdorp-Vogelaar I; Rutter CM; Savarino JE; van Ballegooijen M; Kuntz KM; Zauber AG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2010 Aug; 102(16):1238-52. PubMed ID: 20664028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Markov's modeling for screening strategies for colorectal cancer.
Barouni M; Larizadeh MH; Sabermahani A; Ghaderi H
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2012; 13(10):5125-9. PubMed ID: 23244122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [Economic evaluation of population-based mass screening for the early detection of cancer: a systematic review].
Muszbek N; Koncz T; V Hajdú P; Adány R
Magy Onkol; 2002; 46(2):119-29. PubMed ID: 12202891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Benefits, harms and cost-effectiveness of cancer screening in Australia: an overview of modelling estimates.
Lew JB; Feletto E; Wade S; Caruana M; Kang YJ; Nickson C; Simms KT; Procopio P; Taylor N; Worthington J; Smith D; Canfell K
Public Health Res Pract; 2019 Jul; 29(2):. PubMed ID: 31384886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Cost effectiveness of the NHS breast screening programme: life table model.
Pharoah PD; Sewell B; Fitzsimmons D; Bennett HS; Pashayan N
BMJ; 2013 May; 346():f2618. PubMed ID: 23661112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The cost-effectiveness of screening for colorectal cancer.
Telford JJ; Levy AR; Sambrook JC; Zou D; Enns RA
CMAJ; 2010 Sep; 182(12):1307-13. PubMed ID: 20624866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Cancer preventive screening: a cross-border comparison of United States and Canadian Chinese women.
Tu SP; Jackson SL; Yasui Y; Deschamps M; Hislop TG; Taylor VM
Prev Med; 2005 Jul; 41(1):36-46. PubMed ID: 15916991
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Cost-utility analysis of colonoscopy or faecal immunochemical test for population-based organised colorectal cancer screening.
Areia M; Fuccio L; Hassan C; Dekker E; Dias-Pereira A; Dinis-Ribeiro M
United European Gastroenterol J; 2019 Feb; 7(1):105-113. PubMed ID: 30788122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Optimal use of colonoscopy and fecal immunochemical test for population-based colorectal cancer screening: a cost-effectiveness analysis using Japanese data.
Sekiguchi M; Igarashi A; Matsuda T; Matsumoto M; Sakamoto T; Nakajima T; Kakugawa Y; Yamamoto S; Saito H; Saito Y
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2016 Feb; 46(2):116-25. PubMed ID: 26685321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Cost-Effectiveness of Personalized Screening for Colorectal Cancer Based on Polygenic Risk and Family History.
Cenin DR; Naber SK; de Weerdt AC; Jenkins MA; Preen DB; Ee HC; O'Leary PC; Lansdorp-Vogelaar I
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2020 Jan; 29(1):10-21. PubMed ID: 31748260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Liquid-based cytology in cervical screening: an updated rapid and systematic review and economic analysis.
Karnon J; Peters J; Platt J; Chilcott J; McGoogan E; Brewer N
Health Technol Assess; 2004 May; 8(20):iii, 1-78. PubMed ID: 15147611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Can breast and cervical cancer screening visits be used to enhance colorectal cancer screening?
Carlos RC; Fendrick AM; Ellis J; Bernstein SJ
J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Oct; 1(10):769-76. PubMed ID: 17411698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Health benefits and cost-effectiveness of a hybrid screening strategy for colorectal cancer.
Dinh T; Ladabaum U; Alperin P; Caldwell C; Smith R; Levin TR
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2013 Sep; 11(9):1158-66. PubMed ID: 23542330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Benefits and costs of using HPV testing to screen for cervical cancer.
Mandelblatt JS; Lawrence WF; Womack SM; Jacobson D; Yi B; Hwang YT; Gold K; Barter J; Shah K
JAMA; 2002 May; 287(18):2372-81. PubMed ID: 11988058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Impact of state-specific Medicaid reimbursement and eligibility policies on receipt of cancer screening.
Halpern MT; Romaire MA; Haber SG; Tangka FK; Sabatino SA; Howard DH
Cancer; 2014 Oct; 120(19):3016-24. PubMed ID: 25154930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Economic evaluation of policy options for prevention and control of cervical cancer in Thailand.
Praditsitthikorn N; Teerawattananon Y; Tantivess S; Limwattananon S; Riewpaiboon A; Chichareon S; Ieumwananonthachai N; Tangcharoensathien V
Pharmacoeconomics; 2011 Sep; 29(9):781-806. PubMed ID: 21838332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Cost effectiveness of CT colonography for UK NHS colorectal cancer screening of asymptomatic adults aged 60-69 years.
Lee D; Muston D; Sweet A; Cunningham C; Slater A; Lock K
Appl Health Econ Health Policy; 2010; 8(3):141-54. PubMed ID: 20369905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
