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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18339650)

  • 21. The effect of an organized, nationwide breast cancer screening programme on non-organized mammography activities.
    Boncz I; Sebestyén A; Pintér I; Battyány I; Ember I
    J Med Screen; 2008; 15(1):14-7. PubMed ID: 18416949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Exploring the effects of population mobility on cervical screening coverage.
    Millett C; Bardsley M; Binysh K
    Public Health; 2002 Nov; 116(6):353-60. PubMed ID: 12407475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Adherence to cervical and breast cancer programs is crucial to improving screening performance.
    Mauad EC; Nicolau SM; Moreira LF; Haikel RL; Longatto-Filho A; Baracat EC
    Rural Remote Health; 2009; 9(3):1241. PubMed ID: 19778158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The role of health insurance coverage in cancer screening utilization.
    Robinson JM; Shavers V
    J Health Care Poor Underserved; 2008 Aug; 19(3):842-56. PubMed ID: 18677074
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Impact of invitation schemes on breast cancer screening coverage: A cohort study from Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Jacobsen KK; von Euler Chelpin M; Vejborg I; Lynge E
    J Med Screen; 2017 Mar; 24(1):20-26. PubMed ID: 27206815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Slippage in the NHS breast screening programme: an assessment of whether a three year screening round is being achieved.
    Faux AM; Lawrence GM; Wheaton ME; Wallis MG; Jeffery CL; Griffiths RK
    J Med Screen; 1998; 5(2):88-91. PubMed ID: 9718527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [The effectiveness of population-based breast cancer screening programme].
    Szynglarewicz B; Matkowski R; Kasprzak P; Kotowska J; Forgacz J; Pudełko M; Kornafel J
    Pol Merkur Lekarski; 2009 Feb; 26(152):117-20. PubMed ID: 19388515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Screening and prevention of breast cancer in primary care.
    Tice JA; Kerlikowske K
    Prim Care; 2009 Sep; 36(3):533-58. PubMed ID: 19616154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Inequalities in breast and cervical cancer screening among urban Mexican women.
    Couture MC; Nguyen CT; Alvarado BE; Velasquez LD; Zunzunegui MV
    Prev Med; 2008 Nov; 47(5):471-6. PubMed ID: 18675296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Economic evaluation of the new national breast cancer screening programme in France: application to the Bouche-du-Rhone district].
    Giorgi R; Reynaud J; Wait S; Seradour B
    Bull Cancer; 2005 Nov; 92(11):995-1001. PubMed ID: 16316834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Uptake of screening for breast cancer in south Lancashire.
    Gatrell A; Garnett S; Rigby J; Maddocks A; Kirwan M
    Public Health; 1998 Sep; 112(5):297-301. PubMed ID: 9807924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluation of effectiveness of quality-assured mammography screening in Germany: sample size considerations and design options.
    Becker N; Hakama M; Nyström L
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 2007 Jun; 16(3):225-31. PubMed ID: 17415093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluation of the impact of breast cancer screening in South Australia.
    Tallis GM; O'Neill TJ
    Intern Med J; 2009 Mar; 39(3):174-8. PubMed ID: 19383066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Determinants of compliance in a cluster randomised controlled trial on screening of breast and cervix cancer in Mumbai, India. 1. Compliance to screening.
    Dinshaw K; Mishra G; Shastri S; Badwe R; Kerkar R; Ramani S; Thakur M; Uplap P; Kakade A; Gupta S; Ganesh B
    Oncology; 2007; 73(3-4):145-53. PubMed ID: 18408401
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Overdiagnosis, sojourn time, and sensitivity in the Copenhagen mammography screening program.
    Olsen AH; Agbaje OF; Myles JP; Lynge E; Duffy SW
    Breast J; 2006; 12(4):338-42. PubMed ID: 16848843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Evaluation of a community-based intervention to enhance breast cancer screening practices in Brazil.
    Thuler LC; Freitas HG
    J Eval Clin Pract; 2008 Dec; 14(6):1012-7. PubMed ID: 18759754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Does educational level determine screening participation?
    von Euler-Chelpin M; Olsen AH; Njor S; Jensen A; Vejborg I; Schwartz W; Lynge E
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 2008 Jun; 17(3):273-8. PubMed ID: 18414200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Impact of second reminder invitation on uptake of screening and cancer detection in BreastCheck.
    Fleming P; Mooney T; Fitzpatrick P
    Ir Med J; 2012 Jan; 105(1):7-9. PubMed ID: 22397204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Compliance with recommended cancer screening among emergency department patients: a multicenter survey.
    Ginde AA; Millen JC; Love JS; Pang JM; Camargo CA
    Acad Emerg Med; 2008 May; 15(5):483-6. PubMed ID: 18439206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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