128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3093347)
1. [Present status and problems of mass screening--from the viewpoint of public health].
Miyake K
Hokkaido Igaku Zasshi; 1986 Jul; 61(4):515-9. PubMed ID: 3093347
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. [Promises, disappointments and possibilities of screening tests].
Saarelma O; Hakama M
Duodecim; 2000; 116(8):869-70. PubMed ID: 11787128
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Medical practice and multiphasic screening.
Hecker R
Med J Aust; 1975 Sep; 2(10):398-401. PubMed ID: 810645
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. [Routine health screening, yes or no? It depends].
Köck CM
Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1997 Mar; 109(5):141-4. PubMed ID: 9173661
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Screening for gynecologic cancer.
Pretorius G
Surg Oncol Clin N Am; 1998 Apr; 7(2):263-9. PubMed ID: 9537975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The periodic health examination.
Rose SD
Prim Care; 1980 Dec; 7(4):653-65. PubMed ID: 6782598
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The costs and benefits of breast cancer screening.
Miller AB
Am J Prev Med; 1993; 9(3):175-80. PubMed ID: 8347369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Critical evaluation of a cost-effectiveness analysis].
Sendi PP; Bucher HC; Steurer J
Praxis (Bern 1994); 1998 Dec; 87(49):1695-702. PubMed ID: 9887670
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. [Economic evaluation of the new national breast cancer screening programme in France: application to the Bouche-du-Rhone district].
Giorgi R; Reynaud J; Wait S; Seradour B
Bull Cancer; 2005 Nov; 92(11):995-1001. PubMed ID: 16316834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Should we screen for hemochromatosis? Critical analysis of the literature].
Charvet-Protat S; Yaouanq J; Fleurette F
Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 1997 Sep; 45(4):315-27. PubMed ID: 9380912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Screening. What documentation should be required?].
Olsen J
Ugeskr Laeger; 2002 Jan; 164(2):148-52. PubMed ID: 11831074
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. [Neonatal screening for metabolic diseases--a task without priority in the Norwegian health policy?].
Pettersen RD; Saugstad OD; Lie SO
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 1995 Feb; 115(5):607-8. PubMed ID: 7900116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Screening for colorectal cancer: which test can we afford?
Lansdorp-Vogelaar I; van Ballegooijen M; Kuipers EJ
Z Gastroenterol; 2008 Apr; 46 Suppl 1():S38-40. PubMed ID: 18368641
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. An evaluation of screening for cystic fibrosis.
Wilcken B
Prog Clin Biol Res; 1987; 254():201-15. PubMed ID: 3124128
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. [Screening for carcinoma of the cervix today].
Calzolari E; Ciampaglia G; Coppola S
Minerva Ginecol; 1996 Nov; 48(11):453-61. PubMed ID: 9005371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. More on 'universal'versus'selected' screening for thrombophilia: the hidden costs of false-positive diagnosis.
Favaloro EJ
Br J Haematol; 2006 Jul; 134(2):239-40; author reply 241. PubMed ID: 16846484
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Making decisions about screening for ovarian cancer. Mass screening may not prove to be sound public health policy.
Bell R
BMJ; 2000 Apr; 320(7239):940; author reply 940-1. PubMed ID: 10787261
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. [Partial re-screening of all negative smears. A method of quality control of pathology department concerning smear screening against cervix cancer].
Jensen ML; Dybdahl H; Svanholm H
Ugeskr Laeger; 2000 May; 162(21):3024-7. PubMed ID: 10850190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Screening for hemoglobin disorders in Thai pregnant women by England and Frazer's calculation method.
Suwansaksri J; Wiwanitkit V; Paritpokee N
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2004 Dec; 270(4):211-3. PubMed ID: 13680265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Economic approach to breast cancer screening in Belgium].
Grivegnée AR; Autier P
Rev Med Brux; 2001 Sep; 22(4):A277-81. PubMed ID: 11680188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
