98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24615416)
1. The value of improving failures within a cervical cancer screening program: an example from Norway.
Burger EA; Kim JJ
Int J Cancer; 2014 Oct; 135(8):1931-9. PubMed ID: 24615416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Inefficiencies and High-Value Improvements in U.S. Cervical Cancer Screening Practice: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Kim JJ; Campos NG; Sy S; Burger EA; Cuzick J; Castle PE; Hunt WC; Waxman A; Wheeler CM;
Ann Intern Med; 2015 Oct; 163(8):589-97. PubMed ID: 26414147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost-effectiveness of increasing cervical cancer screening coverage in the Middle East: An example from Lebanon.
Sharma M; Seoud M; Kim JJ
Vaccine; 2017 Jan; 35(4):564-569. PubMed ID: 28017434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Adapting cervical cancer screening for women vaccinated against human papillomavirus infections: The value of stratifying guidelines.
Pedersen K; Burger EA; Nygård M; Kristiansen IS; Kim JJ
Eur J Cancer; 2018 Mar; 91():68-75. PubMed ID: 29335156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Inefficiencies of over-screening and under-screening for cervical cancer prevention in the U.S.
Castle PE; Wheeler CM; Campos NG; Sy S; Burger EA; Kim JJ;
Prev Med; 2018 Jun; 111():177-179. PubMed ID: 29548787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening with primary human papillomavirus testing in Norway.
Burger EA; Ortendahl JD; Sy S; Kristiansen IS; Kim JJ
Br J Cancer; 2012 Apr; 106(9):1571-8. PubMed ID: 22441643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cervical cancer screening program based on primary DNA-HPV testing in a Brazilian city: a cost-effectiveness study protocol.
Teixeira JC; Vale DB; Bragança JF; Campos CS; Discacciati MG; Zeferino LC
BMC Public Health; 2020 Apr; 20(1):576. PubMed ID: 32345284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. To expand coverage, or increase frequency: Quantifying the tradeoffs between equity and efficiency facing cervical cancer screening programs in low-resource settings.
Campos NG; Tsu V; Jeronimo J; Mvundura M; Lee K; Kim JJ
Int J Cancer; 2017 Mar; 140(6):1293-1305. PubMed ID: 27925175
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cervical cancer screening in low-resource settings: A cost-effectiveness framework for valuing tradeoffs between test performance and program coverage.
Campos NG; Castle PE; Wright TC; Kim JJ
Int J Cancer; 2015 Nov; 137(9):2208-19. PubMed ID: 25943074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Estimating the value of point-of-care HPV testing in three low- and middle-income countries: a modeling study.
Campos NG; Tsu V; Jeronimo J; Mvundura M; Kim JJ
BMC Cancer; 2017 Nov; 17(1):791. PubMed ID: 29178896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Cost-Effectiveness of Cervical Self-Sampling to Improve Routine Cervical Cancer Screening: The Importance of Respondent Screening History and Compliance.
Burger EA; Sy S; Nygård M; Kim JJ
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2017 Jan; 26(1):95-103. PubMed ID: 27624639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Health and economic impact of human papillomavirus 16 and 18 vaccination of preadolescent girls and cervical cancer screening of adult women in Peru.
Goldie SJ; Levin C; Mosqueira-Lovón NR; Ortendahl J; Kim J; O'Shea M; Diaz Sanchez M; Mendoza Araujo MA
Rev Panam Salud Publica; 2012 Dec; 32(6):426-34. PubMed ID: 23370186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cervical cancer screening among HIV-infected women: an economic evaluation in a middle-income country.
Vanni T; Luz PM; Grinsztejn B; Veloso VG; Foss A; Mesa-Frias M; Legood R
Int J Cancer; 2012 Jul; 131(2):E96-104. PubMed ID: 21964797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Age at last screening and remaining lifetime risk of cervical cancer in older, unvaccinated, HPV-negative women: a modelling study.
Malagón T; Kulasingam S; Mayrand MH; Ogilvie G; Smith L; Bouchard C; Gotlieb W; Franco EL
Lancet Oncol; 2018 Dec; 19(12):1569-1578. PubMed ID: 30392810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Primary screening for human papillomavirus compared with cytology screening for cervical cancer in European settings: cost effectiveness analysis based on a Dutch microsimulation model.
de Kok IM; van Rosmalen J; Dillner J; Arbyn M; Sasieni P; Iftner T; van Ballegooijen M
BMJ; 2012 Mar; 344():e670. PubMed ID: 22391612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Optimal Cervical Cancer Screening in Women Vaccinated Against Human Papillomavirus.
Kim JJ; Burger EA; Sy S; Campos NG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2017 Feb; 109(2):. PubMed ID: 27754955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Cost-effectiveness of an HPV self-collection campaign in Uganda: comparing models for delivery of cervical cancer screening in a low-income setting.
Campos NG; Tsu V; Jeronimo J; Njama-Meya D; Mvundura M; Kim JJ
Health Policy Plan; 2017 Sep; 32(7):956-968. PubMed ID: 28369405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cost effectiveness of human papillomavirus testing to augment cervical cancer screening in women infected with the human immunodeficiency virus.
Goldie SJ; Freedberg KA; Weinstein MC; Wright TC; Kuntz KM
Am J Med; 2001 Aug; 111(2):140-9. PubMed ID: 11498068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A cost-utility analysis of cervical cancer screening and human papillomavirus vaccination in the Philippines.
Guerrero AM; Genuino AJ; Santillan M; Praditsitthikorn N; Chantarastapornchit V; Teerawattananon Y; Alejandria M; Toral JA
BMC Public Health; 2015 Jul; 15():730. PubMed ID: 26223975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus self-collection among cervical cancer screening non-attenders in El Salvador.
Campos NG; Alfaro K; Maza M; Sy S; Melendez M; Masch R; Soler M; Conzuelo-Rodriguez G; Gage JC; Alonzo TA; Castle PE; Felix JC; Cremer M; Kim JJ
Prev Med; 2020 Feb; 131():105931. PubMed ID: 31765712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
