225 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29626738)
41. The case for investing in the prevention and treatment of overweight and obesity among children and adolescents in three middle-income countries.
Jackson-Morris A; Meyer CL
Lancet Glob Health; 2023 Mar; 11 Suppl 1():S18. PubMed ID: 36866475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Cost-effectiveness of mammography, MRI, and ultrasonography for breast cancer screening.
Feig S
Radiol Clin North Am; 2010 Sep; 48(5):879-91. PubMed ID: 20868891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. The SmokingPaST Framework: illustrating the impact of quit attempts, quit methods, and new smokers on smoking prevalence, years of life saved, medical costs saved, programming costs, cost effectiveness, and return on investment.
O'Donnell MP; Roizen MF
Am J Health Promot; 2011; 26(1):e11-23. PubMed ID: 21879928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Accrued Cost Savings of a Free Clinic Using Quality-Adjusted Life Years Saved and Return on Investment.
Sanders J; Lacey M; Guse CE
J Am Board Fam Med; 2017; 30(4):505-512. PubMed ID: 28720631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Breast Cancer Screening in Rural Iran.
Zehtab N; Jafari M; Barooni M; Nakhaee N; Goudarzi R; Larry Zadeh MH
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2016; 17(2):609-14. PubMed ID: 26925651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Breast cancer: better care for less cost. Is it possible?
Evans WK; Will BP; Berthelot JM; Logan DM; Mirsky DJ; Kelly N
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2000; 16(4):1168-78. PubMed ID: 11155836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. The relationship between return on investment and quality of study methodology in workplace health promotion programs.
Baxter S; Sanderson K; Venn AJ; Blizzard CL; Palmer AJ
Am J Health Promot; 2014; 28(6):347-63. PubMed ID: 24977496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Cost-effectiveness of the Norwegian breast cancer screening program.
van Luijt PA; Heijnsdijk EA; de Koning HJ
Int J Cancer; 2017 Feb; 140(4):833-840. PubMed ID: 27861849
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Costs of breast cancer and the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening.
Elixhauser A
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 1991; 7(4):604-15. PubMed ID: 1778705
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of colorectal cancer screenings in a low- and middle-income country: example from Thailand.
Phisalprapa P; Supakankunti S; Chaiyakunapruk N
J Med Econ; 2019 Dec; 22(12):1351-1361. PubMed ID: 31560247
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Diagnostic and therapeutic path of breast cancer: effectiveness, appropriateness, and costs--results from the DOCMa study.
Giovagnoli MR; Bonifacino A; Neglia C; Benvenuto M; Sambati FV; Giolli L; Giovagnoli A; Piscitelli P
Clin Interv Aging; 2015; 10():741-9. PubMed ID: 25945041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. [Cost-Effectiveness of the 21 Gene Assay in Patients with Node-Positive Breast Cancer].
Fischer L; Arnold M; Kirsch F; Leidl R
Gesundheitswesen; 2016 Nov; 78(11):772-780. PubMed ID: 26107965
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. Is mammography for breast cancer screening cost-effective in both Western and asian countries?: results of a systematic review.
Yoo KB; Kwon JA; Cho E; Kang MH; Nam JM; Choi KS; Kim EK; Choi YJ; Park EC
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2013; 14(7):4141-9. PubMed ID: 23991967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Return on Investment of the Primary Health Care Integrated Geriatric Services Initiative Implementation.
Thanh NX; Patil T; Knudsen C; Hamlin SN; Lightfoot H; Hanson HM; Cleaver D; Chan K; Silvius J; Oddie S; Fielding S
J Ment Health Policy Econ; 2020 Sep; 23(3):101-109. PubMed ID: 32853159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Balancing the benefits and detriments among women targeted by the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program.
Hofvind S; Román M; Sebuødegård S; Falk RS
J Med Screen; 2016 Dec; 23(4):203-209. PubMed ID: 26940960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Cost-Effectiveness of Screening and Treatment for Cervical Cancer in Tanzania: Implications for other Sub-Saharan African Countries.
Nelson S; Kim J; Wilson FA; Soliman AS; Ngoma T; Kahesa C; Mwaiselage J
Value Health Reg Issues; 2016 Sep; 10():1-6. PubMed ID: 27881270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Reducing by half the percentage of late-stage presentation for breast and cervix cancer over 4 years: a pilot study of clinical downstaging in Sarawak, Malaysia.
Devi BC; Tang TS; Corbex M
Ann Oncol; 2007 Jul; 18(7):1172-6. PubMed ID: 17434897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. A rapid-response economic evaluation of the UK NHS Cancer Reform Strategy breast cancer screening program extension via a plausible bounds approach.
Madan J; Rawdin A; Stevenson M; Tappenden P
Value Health; 2010; 13(2):215-21. PubMed ID: 19878494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Predicting the stage shift as a result of breast cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries: a proof of concept.
Zelle SG; Baltussen R; Otten JD; Heijnsdijk EA; van Schoor G; Broeders MJ
J Med Screen; 2015 Mar; 22(1):8-19. PubMed ID: 25416699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Patient navigation for breast and colorectal cancer in 3 community hospital settings: an economic evaluation.
Donaldson EA; Holtgrave DR; Duffin RA; Feltner F; Funderburk W; Freeman HP
Cancer; 2012 Oct; 118(19):4851-9. PubMed ID: 22392629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
