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 *

72 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18761876)

  • 1. [Adverse incidents in a cervical cancer screening programme].
    Bro F; Svanholm H; Støvring H; Frandsen C
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2008 Sep; 170(36):2794-7. PubMed ID: 18761876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Follow-up of non-negative cervical cytological smears in the county of Funen].
    Dahl MB; Hølund B; Sørensen B; Ahrons S; Grinsted P; Poulsen EF
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1998 Sep; 160(40):5798-801. PubMed ID: 9782760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Mass screening against cervical cancer--what are the viewpoints of female general practitioners?].
    Krohg M; Malterud K
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 1995 Mar; 115(7):817-9. PubMed ID: 7701487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. The uptake of cervical cancer screening by renal transplant recipients.
    Courtney AE; Leonard N; O'Neill CJ; McNamee PT; Maxwell AP
    Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2009 Feb; 24(2):647-52. PubMed ID: 18952575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Evaluation of the follow-up of women aged 50-74 years after cervical cytological Ascus abnormalities in cancer screening: adherence to clinical practice guidelines in Isere, France; 1991-2000].
    Billette-de-Villemeur A; Poncet F; Garnier A; Marron J; Le Marc'hadour F; Morens A; Rouault-Plantaz V; Ney M; Exbrayat C
    Gynecol Obstet Fertil; 2009 Oct; 37(10):787-95. PubMed ID: 19782628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The psychological costs of inadequate cervical smear test results: three-month follow-up.
    French DP; Maissi E; Marteau TM
    Psychooncology; 2006 Jun; 15(6):498-508. PubMed ID: 16184520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [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]  

  • 9. Loss to follow-up of patients with abnormal Pap smear: magnitude and reasons.
    Thinkhamrop J; Lumbiganon P; Jitpakdeebodin S
    J Med Assoc Thai; 1998 Nov; 81(11):862-5. PubMed ID: 9803086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Two cytological methods for screening for cervical cancer].
    Kirschner B; Simonsen K; Junge J
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2008 May; 170(22):1933-7. PubMed ID: 18513478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of follow-up for low-grade cytological abnormalities in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 2000-2005.
    Benard VB; Howe W; Saraiya M; Helsel W; Lawson HW
    J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2008 Oct; 12(4):300-6. PubMed ID: 18820545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Knowledge and awareness of cervical cancer and screening among Malaysian women who have never had a Pap smear: a qualitative study.
    Wong LP; Wong YL; Low WY; Khoo EM; Shuib R
    Singapore Med J; 2009 Jan; 50(1):49-53. PubMed ID: 19224084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Educational level and cervical cancer screening programs in a Venezuelan urban area.
    Núñez-Troconis J; Velásquez J; Mindiola R; Munroe D
    Invest Clin; 2008 Sep; 49(3):331-9. PubMed ID: 18846774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [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]  

  • 15. [Cervical smears taken by physicians' assistants are of lesser quality than smears taken by family physicians, but almost as good as the national average].
    Voordijk-van der Ben MH; Buntinx F
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jan; 144(2):74-7. PubMed ID: 10674106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Reported cancer screening practices of nephrologists: results from a national survey.
    Wong G; Webster AC; Chapman JR; Craig JC
    Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2009 Jul; 24(7):2136-43. PubMed ID: 19188339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Promotion of cervical screening among nonattendees: a partial cost-effectiveness analysis.
    Oscarsson MG; Benzein EG; Wijma BE; Carlsson PG
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 2007 Dec; 16(6):559-63. PubMed ID: 18090130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Vaginal smears on clinical indication in a county with systematized screening].
    Uhre TB; Bichel P; Olesen F
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1996 Dec; 159(1):52-6. PubMed ID: 9012075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Follow-up of abnormal or inadequate cervical smears using two guidance systems: RCT on effectiveness.
    Hermens RP; Siebers BG; Hulscher ME; Braspenning JC; van Doremalen JH; Hanselaar A; Grol RP; van Weel C
    Prev Med; 2005; 41(5-6):809-14. PubMed ID: 16169582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cervical cytology specimen adequacy: patient management guidelines and optimizing specimen collection.
    Davey DD; Cox JT; Austin RM; Birdsong G; Colgan TJ; Howell LP; Husain M; Darragh TM
    J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2008 Apr; 12(2):71-81. PubMed ID: 18369299
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.