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.
265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19371308)
1. Screen-detected invasive cervical carcinoma and its clinical significance during the introduction of organized screening. Herbert A; Anshu ; Gregory M; Gupta SS; Singh N BJOG; 2009 May; 116(6):854-9. PubMed ID: 19371308 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Investigation of the effect of occult invasive cancer on progress towards successful cervical screening. Herbert A; Bryant TN; Campbell MJ; Smith J J Med Screen; 1998; 5(2):92-8. PubMed ID: 9718528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Invasive cervical cancer audit: a relative increase in interval cancers while coverage increased and incidence declined. Herbert A; Anshu ; Gregory M; Gupta SS; Singh N BJOG; 2009 May; 116(6):845-53. PubMed ID: 19432575 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Differences in screening history, tumour characteristics and survival between women with screen-detected versus not screen-detected cervical cancer in the east of The Netherlands, 1992-2001. van der Aa MA; Schutter EM; Looijen-Salamon M; Martens JE; Siesling S Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2008 Aug; 139(2):204-9. PubMed ID: 18093720 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Invasive cervical cancer in Southampton and South West Hampshire: effect of introducing a comprehensive screening programme. Herbert A; Breen C; Bryant TN; Hitchcock A; Macdonald H; Millward-Sadler GH; Smith J J Med Screen; 1996; 3(1):23-8. PubMed ID: 8861047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cervical cancer incidence and screening: status report on women in the United States. Martin LM; Parker SL; Wingo PA; Heath CW Cancer Pract; 1996; 4(3):130-4. PubMed ID: 8826141 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Comparison of the clinical features of uterine cervical cancers detected by mass screening and voluntary visit]. Yoh S; Hasuo Y; Tanaka H; Yakushizi M; Sakurai T Gan To Kagaku Ryoho; 1988 Jun; 15(6):1949-57. PubMed ID: 3382243 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Review of the screening history of Alberta women with invasive cervical cancer. Stuart GC; McGregor SE; Duggan MA; Nation JG CMAJ; 1997 Sep; 157(5):513-9. PubMed ID: 9294389 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Nationwide breast cancer screening fully accomplished; results from the implementation phase 1990-1997. National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jun; 144(23):1124-9. PubMed ID: 10876708 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The clinical and pathological differences in prevalent round screen-detected and symptomatic invasive breast cancer. Sweeney KJ; Kell MR; Aziz NA; Prunty N; Holloway P; Kennedy M; Flanagan F; Kerin MJ Ir Med J; 2007 Sep; 100(8):550-2. PubMed ID: 17955686 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Pathways to diagnosis of cervical cancer: screening history, delay in follow up, and smear reading. Priest P; Sadler L; Peters J; Crengle S; Bethwaite P; Medley G; Jackson R BJOG; 2007 Apr; 114(4):398-407. PubMed ID: 17166215 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden. Andrae B; Kemetli L; Sparén P; Silfverdal L; Strander B; Ryd W; Dillner J; Törnberg S J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 May; 100(9):622-9. PubMed ID: 18445828 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Modelling the impact of detecting and treating ductal carcinoma in situ in a breast screening programme. McCann J; Treasure P; Duffy S J Med Screen; 2004; 11(3):117-25. PubMed ID: 15333269 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clinicopathological characteristics of cervical cancer between 2003 and 2005, after the introduction of a national cancer screening program in Slovenia. Takac I; Ursic-Vrscaj M; Repse-Fokter A; Kodric T; Rakar S; Mozina A; Smrkolj S; Primic-Zakelj M; Strzinar V; Vakselj A; Arko D Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2008 Sep; 140(1):82-9. PubMed ID: 18400358 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Basal phenotype: a powerful prognostic factor in small screen-detected invasive breast cancer with long-term follow-up. Evans AJ; Rakha EA; Pinder SE; Green AR; Paish C; Ellis IO J Med Screen; 2007; 14(4):210-4. PubMed ID: 18078567 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Factors associated with tumour stage at presentation in invasive cervical cancer. Ndlovu N; Kambarami R Cent Afr J Med; 2003; 49(9-10):107-11. PubMed ID: 15298465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Limited education as a risk factor in cervical cancer. Corral F; Cueva P; Yépez J; Montes E Bull Pan Am Health Organ; 1996 Dec; 30(4):322-9. PubMed ID: 9041743 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The use of cervical screening history data to interpret cervical cancer incidence trends. Clare J; Edwards D; Bagnall H; Pearmain P; Lawrence G J Public Health (Oxf); 2008 Jun; 30(2):171-7. PubMed ID: 18296455 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Local impact of the English arm of the UK Bowel Cancer Screening Pilot study. Goodyear SJ; Stallard N; Gaunt A; Parker R; Williams N; Wong L Br J Surg; 2008 Sep; 95(9):1172-9. PubMed ID: 18690636 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Incidence of cervical carcinoma in a high-risk, non-screened area results of a retrospective analysis on the Dutch Caribbean Antilles from 1983 to 1998. Bax A; Voigt RR; Coronel CC; Putter H; de Bie Leuving Tjeenk RM; van Marwijk HW West Indian Med J; 2004 Jun; 53(3):150-4. PubMed ID: 15352742 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]