157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26307516)
21. Universal antenatal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing programme is cost-effective despite a low HIV prevalence in Hong Kong.
Lee PM; Wong KH
Hong Kong Med J; 2007 Jun; 13(3):199-207. PubMed ID: 17548908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Systematic screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: estimating cost-effectiveness using dynamic modeling and Dutch data.
de Vries R; van Bergen JE; de Jong-van den Berg LT; Postma MJ;
Value Health; 2006; 9(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 16441519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Chlamydia screening in pregnancy in Australia: integration of national guidelines into clinical practice and policy.
Li Z; Chen M; Guy R; Wand H; Oats J; Sullivan EA
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2013 Aug; 53(4):338-46. PubMed ID: 23870029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Socio-economic aspects of extended STD screening in pregnancy.
Postma MJ; Jager JC; de Jong-van den Berg LT
AIDS Care; 2000 Dec; 12(6):731-5. PubMed ID: 11177452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The cost effectiveness of screening for genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Australia.
Walleser S; Salkeld G; Donovan B
Sex Health; 2006 Dec; 3(4):225-34. PubMed ID: 17112432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Cost-utility of repeated screening for Chlamydia trachomatis.
de Vries R; van Bergen JE; de Jong-van den Berg LT; Postma MJ;
Value Health; 2008; 11(2):272-4. PubMed ID: 18380639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Risk assessment and other screening options for gonorrhoea and chlamydial infections in women attending rural Tanzanian antenatal clinics.
Mayaud P; Grosskurth H; Changalucha J; Todd J; West B; Gabone R; Senkoro K; Rusizoka M; Laga M; Hayes R
Bull World Health Organ; 1995; 73(5):621-30. PubMed ID: 8846488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Cost-effectiveness of prenatal testing for Chlamydia trachomatis.
Nettleman MD; Bell TA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1991 May; 164(5 Pt 1):1289-94. PubMed ID: 1903593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Chlamydia screening is not cost-effective at low participation rates: evidence from a repeated register-based implementation study in The Netherlands.
de Wit GA; Over EA; Schmid BV; van Bergen JE; van den Broek IV; van der Sande MA; Welte R; Op de Coul EL; Kretzschmar ME
Sex Transm Infect; 2015 Sep; 91(6):423-9. PubMed ID: 25759475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Potentials of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in Hungary: cost-benefit analysis].
Nyári T; Mészáros G; Deák J; Nagy E; Kovács L
Orv Hetil; 2000 Jul; 141(27):1511-6. PubMed ID: 10943109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Evaluation of Chlamydia trachomatis screening from the perspective of health economics: a systematic review.
Yao H; Li C; Tian F; Liu X; Yang S; Xiao Q; Jin Y; Huang S; Zhao P; Ma W; Liu T; Dong X; Wang C
Front Public Health; 2023; 11():1212890. PubMed ID: 37881345
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The impact of natural history parameters on the cost-effectiveness of Chlamydia trachomatis screening strategies.
Hu D; Hook EW; Goldie SJ
Sex Transm Dis; 2006 Jul; 33(7):428-36. PubMed ID: 16572038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Cost-Effectiveness of Opt-Out Chlamydia Testing for High-Risk Young Women in the U.S.
Owusu-Edusei K; Hoover KW; Gift TL
Am J Prev Med; 2016 Aug; 51(2):216-224. PubMed ID: 26952078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Overestimation of complication rates in evaluations of Chlamydia trachomatis screening programmes--implications for cost-effectiveness analyses.
van Valkengoed IG; Morré SA; van den Brule AJ; Meijer CJ; Bouter LM; Boeke AJ
Int J Epidemiol; 2004 Apr; 33(2):416-25. PubMed ID: 15082651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Cost-effectiveness of integrated routine offering of prenatal HIV and syphilis screening in China.
Owusu-Edusei K; Tao G; Gift TL; Wang A; Wang L; Tun Y; Wei X; Wang L; Fuller S; Kamb ML; Bulterys M
Sex Transm Dis; 2014 Feb; 41(2):103-10. PubMed ID: 24413489
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Cost-effectiveness of HIV and syphilis antenatal screening: a modelling study.
Bristow CC; Larson E; Anderson LJ; Klausner JD
Sex Transm Infect; 2016 Aug; 92(5):340-6. PubMed ID: 26920867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Screening pregnant women for chlamydia: what are the predictors of infection?
Chen MY; Fairley CK; De Guingand D; Hocking J; Tabrizi S; Wallace EM; Grover S; Gurrin L; Carter R; Pirotta M; Garland S
Sex Transm Infect; 2009 Feb; 85(1):31-5. PubMed ID: 18708481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Mycoplasma genitalium should it be integrated into routine pregnancy care in French young pregnant women?
Peuchant O; Le Roy C; Desveaux C; Paris A; Asselineau J; Maldonado C; Chêne G; Horovitz J; Dallay D; de Barbeyrac B; Bébéar C
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis; 2015 May; 82(1):14-9. PubMed ID: 25753079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Health and cost-benefits of chlamydia screening in young women.
Mangione-Smith R; O'Leary J; McGlynn EA
Sex Transm Dis; 1999 Jul; 26(6):309-16. PubMed ID: 10417017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
