234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19342422)
1. Mass media campaign improves cervical screening across all socio-economic groups.
Anderson JO; Mullins RM; Siahpush M; Spittal MJ; Wakefield M
Health Educ Res; 2009 Oct; 24(5):867-75. PubMed ID: 19342422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Encouraging the right women to attend for cervical cancer screening: results from a targeted television campaign in Victoria, Australia.
Mullins R; Wakefield M; Broun K
Health Educ Res; 2008 Jun; 23(3):477-86. PubMed ID: 17615181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Outcomes from a mass media campaign to promote cervical screening in NSW, Australia.
Morrell S; Perez DA; Hardy M; Cotter T; Bishop JF
J Epidemiol Community Health; 2010 Sep; 64(9):777-83. PubMed ID: 19822553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Promoting cervical screening after introduction of the human papillomavirus vaccine: the effect of repeated mass media campaigns.
Mullins R; Coomber K; Broun K; Wakefield M
J Med Screen; 2013 Mar; 20(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 23514877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cervical cancer screening among women in metropolitan areas of the United States by individual-level and area-based measures of socioeconomic status, 2000 to 2002.
Coughlin SS; King J; Richards TB; Ekwueme DU
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2006 Nov; 15(11):2154-9. PubMed ID: 17119040
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Let's talk about smear tests: social marketing for the National Cervical Screening Programme.
Bethune GR; Lewis HJ
Public Health; 2009 Sep; 123 Suppl 1():e17-22. PubMed ID: 19740498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Encouraging underscreened women to have cervical cancer screening: the effectiveness of a computer strategy.
Campbell E; Peterkin D; Abbott R; Rogers J
Prev Med; 1997; 26(6):801-7. PubMed ID: 9388791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Pressing the key pad: trial of a novel approach to health promotion advice.
Corkrey R; Parkinson L; Bates L
Prev Med; 2005 Aug; 41(2):657-66. PubMed ID: 15917066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [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]
11. Evidence for the effectiveness of a chlamydia awareness campaign: increased population rates of chlamydia testing and detection.
Chen MY; Karvelas M; Sundararajan V; Hocking JS; Fairley CK
Int J STD AIDS; 2007 Apr; 18(4):239-43. PubMed ID: 17509173
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Decisions about Pap tests: what influences women and providers?
Fiebig DG; Haas M; Hossain I; Street DJ; Viney R
Soc Sci Med; 2009 May; 68(10):1766-74. PubMed ID: 19339094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Social inequality in Pap smear coverage: identifying under-users of cervical cancer screening in Argentina.
Arrossi S; Ramos S; Paolino M; Sankaranarayanan R
Reprod Health Matters; 2008 Nov; 16(32):50-8. PubMed ID: 19027622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An evaluation of a campaign to increase cervical cancer screening in rural Victoria.
Hirst S; Mitchell H; Medley G
Community Health Stud; 1990; 14(3):263-8. PubMed ID: 2253461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Participation in highly subsidized cervical cancer screening by women in Enugu, South-east Nigeria.
Obi SN; Ozumba BC; Nwokocha AR; Waboso PA
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2007 Apr; 27(3):305-7. PubMed ID: 17464818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Geographical relationships between sociodemographic factors and incidence of cervical cancer in the Netherlands 1989-2003.
van der Aa MA; Siesling S; Louwman MW; Visser O; Pukkala E; Coebergh JW
Eur J Cancer Prev; 2008 Oct; 17(5):453-9. PubMed ID: 18714188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. [Computerized monitoring for integrated cervical screening. Rationale, methods and indicators of participation].
Bucchi L; Pierri C; Caprara L; Cortecchia S; De Lillo M; Bondi A
Pathologica; 2003 Feb; 95(1):9-21. PubMed ID: 12735281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
