212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33314646)
1. Impact of screening and follow-up colonoscopy adenoma sensitivity on colorectal cancer screening outcomes in the CRC-AIM microsimulation model.
Fisher DA; Saoud L; Hassmiller Lich K; Fendrick AM; Ozbay AB; Borah BJ; Matney M; Parton M; Limburg PJ
Cancer Med; 2021 Apr; 10(8):2855-2864. PubMed ID: 33314646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Impact of Patient Adherence to Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening and Colonoscopy Following a Positive Test on Clinical Outcomes.
Fendrick AM; Fisher DA; Saoud L; Ozbay AB; Karlitz JJ; Limburg PJ
Cancer Prev Res (Phila); 2021 Sep; 14(9):845-850. PubMed ID: 34021023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of Simulated Outcomes Between Stool- and Blood-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests.
Fendrick AM; Vahdat V; Chen JV; Lieberman D; Limburg PJ; Ozbay AB; Kisiel JB
Popul Health Manag; 2023 Aug; 26(4):239-245. PubMed ID: 37466476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The cost-effectiveness of non-invasive stool-based colorectal cancer screening offerings from age 45 for a commercial and medicare population.
Ebner D; Kisiel J; Barnieh L; Sharma R; Smith NJ; Estes C; Vahdat V; Ozbay AB; Limburg P; Fendrick AM
J Med Econ; 2023; 26(1):1219-1226. PubMed ID: 37752872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Analysis of the effectiveness of two noninvasive fecal tests used to screen for colorectal cancer in average-risk adults.
Sharma T
Public Health; 2020 May; 182():70-76. PubMed ID: 32179290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Estimating the impact of differential adherence on the comparative effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer screening using the CRC-AIM microsimulation model.
Piscitello A; Saoud L; Fendrick AM; Borah BJ; Hassmiller Lich K; Matney M; Ozbay AB; Parton M; Limburg PJ
PLoS One; 2020; 15(12):e0244431. PubMed ID: 33373409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Real-world cost-effectiveness of stool-based colorectal cancer screening in a Medicare population.
Fisher DA; Karlitz JJ; Jeyakumar S; Smith N; Limburg P; Lieberman D; Fendrick AM
J Med Econ; 2021; 24(1):654-664. PubMed ID: 33902366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Lowering the colorectal cancer screening age improves predicted outcomes in a microsimulation model.
Fisher DA; Saoud L; Finney Rutten LJ; Ozbay AB; Brooks D; Limburg PJ
Curr Med Res Opin; 2021 Jun; 37(6):1005-1010. PubMed ID: 33769894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Projecting total costs and health consequences of increasing mt-sDNA utilization for colorectal cancer screening from the payer and integrated delivery network perspectives.
Hathway JM; Miller-Wilson LA; Jensen IS; Ozbay B; Regan C; Jena AB; Weinstein MC; Parks PD
J Med Econ; 2020 Jun; 23(6):581-592. PubMed ID: 32063100
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Life-years gained resulting from screening colonoscopy compared with follow-up colonoscopy after a positive stool-based colorectal screening test.
Mark Fendrick A; Borah BJ; Burak Ozbay A; Saoud L; Limburg PJ
Prev Med Rep; 2022 Apr; 26():101701. PubMed ID: 35106276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Estimation of Benefits, Burden, and Harms of Colorectal Cancer Screening Strategies: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
Knudsen AB; Zauber AG; Rutter CM; Naber SK; Doria-Rose VP; Pabiniak C; Johanson C; Fischer SE; Lansdorp-Vogelaar I; Kuntz KM
JAMA; 2016 Jun; 315(23):2595-609. PubMed ID: 27305518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost-Effectiveness of Multitarget Stool DNA Testing vs Colonoscopy or Fecal Immunochemical Testing for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Alaska Native People.
Redwood DG; Dinh TA; Kisiel JB; Borah BJ; Moriarty JP; Provost EM; Sacco FD; Tiesinga JJ; Ahlquist DA
Mayo Clin Proc; 2021 May; 96(5):1203-1217. PubMed ID: 33840520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Quantifying the impact of adherence to screening strategies on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.
D'Andrea E; Ahnen DJ; Sussman DA; Najafzadeh M
Cancer Med; 2020 Jan; 9(2):824-836. PubMed ID: 31777197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. USPSTF colorectal cancer screening guidelines: an extended look at multi-year interval testing.
Berger BM; Parton MA; Levin B
Am J Manag Care; 2016 Feb; 22(2):e77-81. PubMed ID: 26881323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparative Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of a Multitarget Stool DNA Test to Screen for Colorectal Neoplasia.
Ladabaum U; Mannalithara A
Gastroenterology; 2016 Sep; 151(3):427-439.e6. PubMed ID: 27311556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Colonoscopy Findings in FIT+ and mt-sDNA+ Patients versus in Colonoscopy-only Patients: New Hampshire Colonoscopy Registry Data.
Anderson JC; Robinson CM; Hisey W; Limburg PJ; Butterly LF
Cancer Prev Res (Phila); 2022 Jul; 15(7):455-464. PubMed ID: 35378546
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Impact of Eliminating Cost-Sharing by Medicare Beneficiaries for Follow-Up Colonoscopy After a Positive Stool-based Colorectal Cancer Screening Test.
Fendrick AM; Lieberman D; Chen JV; Vahdat V; Ozbay AB; Limburg PJ
Cancer Res Commun; 2023 Oct; 3(10):2113-2117. PubMed ID: 37787758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cost-Effectiveness of Outreach Strategies for Stool-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening in a Medicaid Population.
Karlitz JJ; Fendrick AM; Bhatt J; Coronado GD; Jeyakumar S; Smith NJ; Plescia M; Brooks D; Limburg P; Lieberman D
Popul Health Manag; 2022 Jun; 25(3):343-351. PubMed ID: 34958279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Multitarget stool DNA tests increases colorectal cancer screening among previously noncompliant Medicare patients.
Prince M; Lester L; Chiniwala R; Berger B
World J Gastroenterol; 2017 Jan; 23(3):464-471. PubMed ID: 28210082
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
