158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18841394)
1. Socio-demographic characteristics of participation in the opportunistic German cervical cancer screening programme: results from the EPIC-Heidelberg cohort.
Seidel D; Becker N; Rohrmann S; Nimptsch K; Linseisen J
J Cancer Res Clin Oncol; 2009 Apr; 135(4):533-41. PubMed ID: 18841394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Socio-economic and demographic determinants affecting participation in the Swedish cervical screening program: A population-based case-control study.
Broberg G; Wang J; Östberg AL; Adolfsson A; Nemes S; Sparén P; Strander B
PLoS One; 2018; 13(1):e0190171. PubMed ID: 29320536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Women's social conditions and their participation in Cervical Cancer Population Screening Program in Poland].
Spaczyński M; Nowak-Markwitz E; Januszek-Michalecka L; Karowicz-Bilińska A
Ginekol Pol; 2009 Nov; 80(11):833-8. PubMed ID: 20088397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The importance of socio-economic variables in cancer screening participation: a comparison between population-based and opportunistic screening in the EU-15.
Walsh B; Silles M; O'Neill C
Health Policy; 2011 Aug; 101(3):269-76. PubMed ID: 21420755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Factors associated with participation of Korean women in cervical cancer screening examination by age group.
Lee M; Chang HS; Park EC; Yu SH; Sohn M; Lee SG
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2011; 12(6):1457-62. PubMed ID: 22126481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Factors associated with non-participation in cervical cancer screening - A nationwide study of nearly half a million women in Denmark.
Harder E; Juul KE; Jensen SM; Thomsen LT; Frederiksen K; Kjaer SK
Prev Med; 2018 Jun; 111():94-100. PubMed ID: 29501474
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [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]
8. Association between socioeconomic and demographic characteristics and utilization of colonoscopy in the EPIC-Heidelberg cohort.
Hermann S; Friedrich S; Haug U; Rohrmann S; Becker N; Kaaks R
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2015 Mar; 24(2):81-8. PubMed ID: 25244156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Sociodemographic and lifestyle determinants of non-attendance for cervical cancer screening in Lithuania, 2006-2014.
Petkeviciene J; Ivanauskiene R; Klumbiene J
Public Health; 2018 Mar; 156():79-86. PubMed ID: 29408192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Cervical and breast cancer screening participation for women with chronic conditions in France: results from a national health survey.
Constantinou P; Dray-Spira R; Menvielle G
BMC Cancer; 2016 Mar; 16():255. PubMed ID: 27029643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Organized cervical cancer screening for underpriviledged women].
Piana L; Leandri FX; Jacqueme B; Heid P; Corti J; Andrac-Meyer L; Sancho-Garnier H
Bull Cancer; 2007 May; 94(5):461-7. PubMed ID: 17535784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prevalence and determinants of cervical cytology use in an urban sample of Portuguese women.
Alves C; Alves L; Lunet N
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2009 Nov; 18(6):482-8. PubMed ID: 19734793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Invitation to cervical cancer screening does increase participation in Germany: Results from the MARZY study.
Radde K; Gottschalk A; Bussas U; Schülein S; Schriefer D; Seifert U; Neumann A; Kaiser M; Blettner M; Klug SJ
Int J Cancer; 2016 Sep; 139(5):1018-30. PubMed ID: 27083776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Participation in cervical cancer screening by age and region--a cohort study with a 3 1/2 year follow-up on 2,223,135 women in Bavaria.
Rückinger S; Tauscher M; Redel R; Munte A; Walchner-Bonjean M; Hess J; Schneider A; von Kries R
Gesundheitswesen; 2008 Jun; 70(6):e17-21. PubMed ID: 18661453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparing acculturation scales and their relationship to cancer screening among older Mexican-American women.
Suarez L; Pulley L
J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1995; (18):41-7. PubMed ID: 8562221
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Screening for breast and cervical cancer in a large German city: participation, motivation and knowledge of risk factors.
Klug SJ; Hetzer M; Blettner M
Eur J Public Health; 2005 Feb; 15(1):70-7. PubMed ID: 15788807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Knowledge of Cervical Cancer Screening among Women across Different Socio-Economic Regions of China.
Di J; Rutherford S; Wu J; Song B; Ma L; Chen J; Chu C
PLoS One; 2015; 10(12):e0144819. PubMed ID: 26657110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A population-based study of primary care predictors of non-attendance for cervical screening.
Webb R; Richardson J; Pickles A
J Med Screen; 2004; 11(3):135-40. PubMed ID: 15333272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Organization and results of cervical cancer screening in the German Democratic Republic.
Ebeling K; Nischan P
IARC Sci Publ; 1986; (76):251-66. PubMed ID: 3570410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
