192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27958189)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. [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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
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. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoea, and Trichomonas vaginalis infections among pregnant women and male partners in Dutch midwifery practices: prevalence, risk factors, and perinatal outcomes.
Op de Coul ELM; Peek D; van Weert YWM; Morré SA; Rours I; Hukkelhoven C; de Jonge A; van Benthem B; Pereboom M
Reprod Health; 2021 Jun; 18(1):132. PubMed ID: 34174905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Knowledge and acceptability of Chlamydia trachomatis screening among pregnant women and their partners; a cross-sectional study.
Pereboom MT; Spelten ER; Manniën J; Rours GI; Morré SA; Schellevis FG; Hutton EK
BMC Public Health; 2014 Jul; 14():704. PubMed ID: 25011479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Chlamydia trachomatis infection in a sample of northern Brazilian pregnant women: prevalence and prenatal importance.
Borborema-Alfaia AP; Freitas NS; Astolfi Filho S; Borborema-Santos CM
Braz J Infect Dis; 2013; 17(5):545-50. PubMed ID: 23831212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Cost-effectiveness of screening programs for Chlamydia trachomatis: a population-based dynamic approach.
Welte R; Kretzschmar M; Leidl R; van den Hoek A; Jager JC; Postma MJ
Sex Transm Dis; 2000 Oct; 27(9):518-29. PubMed ID: 11034526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [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]
[Next] [New Search]
