158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26307516)
1. Chlamydia screening for pregnant women aged 16-25 years attending an antenatal service: a cost-effectiveness study.
Ong JJ; Chen M; Hocking J; Fairley CK; Carter R; Bulfone L; Hsueh A
BJOG; 2016 Jun; 123(7):1194-202. PubMed ID: 26307516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in Dutch pregnant women.
Rours GI; Smith-Norowitz TA; Ditkowsky J; Hammerschlag MR; Verkooyen RP; de Groot R; Verbrugh HA; Postma MJ
Pathog Glob Health; 2016; 110(7-8):292-302. PubMed ID: 27958189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. An evaluation of economics and acceptability of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection, in women attending antenatal, abortion, colposcopy and family planning clinics in Scotland, UK.
Norman JE; Wu O; Twaddle S; Macmillan S; McMillan L; Templeton A; McKenzie H; Noone A; Allardice G; Reid M
BJOG; 2004 Nov; 111(11):1261-8. PubMed ID: 15521872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The cost and cost-effectiveness of opportunistic screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in Ireland.
Gillespie P; O'Neill C; Adams E; Turner K; O'Donovan D; Brugha R; Vaughan D; O'Connell E; Cormican M; Balfe M; Coleman C; Fitzgerald M; Fleming C
Sex Transm Infect; 2012 Apr; 88(3):222-8. PubMed ID: 22213681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in women 15 to 29 years of age: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Hu D; Hook EW; Goldie SJ
Ann Intern Med; 2004 Oct; 141(7):501-13. PubMed ID: 15466767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cost-benefit analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in pregnant women in a high burden setting in the United States.
Ditkowsky J; Shah KH; Hammerschlag MR; Kohlhoff S; Smith-Norowitz TA
BMC Infect Dis; 2017 Feb; 17(1):155. PubMed ID: 28214469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Screening for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infection in pregnancy; cost-effectiveness favorable at a minimum prevalence rate of 3% or more].
Postma MJ; Bakker A; Welte R; van Bergen JE; van den Hoek JA; de Jong-van den Berg LT; Jager JC
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Dec; 144(49):2350-4. PubMed ID: 11129971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis in sexually active population of Amsterdam. II. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening women].
Postma MJ; Welte R; van den Hoek JA; van Doornum GJ; Coutinho RA; Jager JC
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 Mar; 143(13):677-81. PubMed ID: 10321301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cost-effectiveness of partner pharmacotherapy in screening women for asymptomatic infection with Chlamydia Trachomatis.
Postma MJ; Welte R; van den Hoek JA; van Doornum GJ; Jager HC; Coutinho RA
Value Health; 2001; 4(3):266-75. PubMed ID: 11705188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Economic evaluation of HIV screening in pregnant women attending antenatal clinics in India.
Kumar M; Birch S; Maturana A; Gafni A
Health Policy; 2006 Jul; 77(2):233-43. PubMed ID: 16126300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in asymptomatic women in Hungary. An epidemiological and cost-effectiveness analysis.
Nyári T; Nyári C; Woodward M; Mészáros G; Deák J; Nagy E; Kovács L
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2001 Apr; 80(4):300-6. PubMed ID: 11264602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The cost effectiveness of opportunistic chlamydia screening in England.
Adams EJ; Turner KM; Edmunds WJ
Sex Transm Infect; 2007 Jul; 83(4):267-74; discussion 274-5. PubMed ID: 17475686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in asymptomatic women attending family planning clinics. A cost-effectiveness analysis of three strategies.
Howell MR; Quinn TC; Gaydos CA
Ann Intern Med; 1998 Feb; 128(4):277-84. PubMed ID: 9471930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The program cost and cost-effectiveness of screening men for Chlamydia to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease in women.
Gift TL; Gaydos CA; Kent CK; Marrazzo JM; Rietmeijer CA; Schillinger JA; Dunne EF
Sex Transm Dis; 2008 Nov; 35(11 Suppl):S66-75. PubMed ID: 18830137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Should all sexually active young women in Hungary be screened for Chlamydia trachomatis?
Nyári T; Woodward M; Kovács L
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2003 Jan; 106(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 12475582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cost effectiveness of home based population screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in the UK: economic evaluation of chlamydia screening studies (ClaSS) project.
Roberts TE; Robinson S; Barton PM; Bryan S; McCarthy A; Macleod J; Egger M; Low N
BMJ; 2007 Aug; 335(7614):291. PubMed ID: 17656504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens.
van Valkengoed IG; Postma MJ; Morré SA; van den Brule AJ; Meijer CJ; Bouter LM; Boeke AJ
Sex Transm Infect; 2001 Aug; 77(4):276-82. PubMed ID: 11463928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Feasibility of Chlamydia trachomatis screening and treatment in pregnant women in Lima, Peru: a prospective study in two large urban hospitals.
Cabeza J; García PJ; Segura E; García P; Escudero F; La Rosa S; León S; Klausner JD
Sex Transm Infect; 2015 Feb; 91(1):7-10. PubMed ID: 25107711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Estimation of the burden of disease and costs of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Canada.
Tuite AR; Jayaraman GC; Allen VG; Fisman DN
Sex Transm Dis; 2012 Apr; 39(4):260-7. PubMed ID: 22421691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The cost effectiveness of universal antenatal screening for HIV in New Zealand.
Bramley D; Graves N; Walker D
AIDS; 2003 Mar; 17(5):741-8. PubMed ID: 12646798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
