185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26952078)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
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. [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]
8. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening adolescent males for Chlamydia on admission to detention.
Blake DR; Gaydos CA; Quinn TC
Sex Transm Dis; 2004 Feb; 31(2):85-95. PubMed ID: 14743071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. Control of Chlamydia trachomatis infections in female army recruits: cost-effective screening and treatment in training cohorts to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease.
Howell MR; Gaydos JC; McKee KT; Quinn TC; Gaydos CA
Sex Transm Dis; 1999 Oct; 26(9):519-26. PubMed ID: 10534206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening via internet-based self-collected swabs compared with clinic-based sample collection.
Huang W; Gaydos CA; Barnes MR; Jett-Goheen M; Blake DR
Sex Transm Dis; 2011 Sep; 38(9):815-20. PubMed ID: 21844736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Modelling the impact of opportunistic screening on the sequelae and public healthcare costs of infection with Chlamydia trachomatis in Australian women.
Ward B; Rodger AJ; Jackson TJ
Public Health; 2006 Jan; 120(1):42-9. PubMed ID: 16271271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Cost effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a review of published studies.
Honey E; Augood C; Templeton A; Russell I; Paavonen J; Mårdh PA; Stary A; Stray-Pedersen B
Sex Transm Infect; 2002 Dec; 78(6):406-12. PubMed ID: 12473799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
