These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

60 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3819590)

  • 1. Evaluation of a cytologic cervical cancer screening program.
    Saikaly HH; Martin D; Traylor L
    J Ky Med Assoc; 1987 Feb; 85(2):75-7. PubMed ID: 3819590
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cost analysis of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: selected states, 2003 to 2004.
    Ekwueme DU; Gardner JG; Subramanian S; Tangka FK; Bapat B; Richardson LC
    Cancer; 2008 Feb; 112(3):626-35. PubMed ID: 18157831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Costs and problems in cervix cancer screening are considerably underestimated].
    Bistoletti P
    Lakartidningen; 2000 Aug; 97(32-33):3506-8. PubMed ID: 11037597
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The safety net: a cost-effective approach to improving breast and cervical cancer screening.
    Vogt TM; Glass A; Glasgow RE; La Chance PA; Lichtenstein E
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2003 Oct; 12(8):789-98. PubMed ID: 14588129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of screening for cancer in the Nordic countries on deaths, cost and quality of life up to the year 2017.
    Hristova L; Hakama M
    Acta Oncol; 1997; 36 Suppl 9():1-60. PubMed ID: 9143316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The Kentucky Women's Cancer Screening Program.
    Breckel C; Combs B; Hoskins J; Key C; Lancaster L; Maratha S; Shepherd RA
    J Ky Med Assoc; 2007 May; 105(5):209-11. PubMed ID: 17566463
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Efficacy of organized screening in comparison to spontaneous Pap samples in the prevention of invasive cervical cancer].
    Kallio M; Nieminen P; Anttila A; Hakama M
    Duodecim; 2001; 117(14):1442-6. PubMed ID: 12181953
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Outcome and future of mass screening for uterine cervical cancer].
    Noda K; Tejima K
    Gan No Rinsho; 1983 May; 29(6):483-7. PubMed ID: 6410103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Costs and effects of alternative screening programs against cervical cancer].
    Gyrd-Hansen D; Hølund B; Andersen P
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1996 Aug; 158(35):4912-5. PubMed ID: 8801698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Cost-benefit analysis of proposals for mass examination for cancer of the cervix].
    Kamper-Jorgensen F
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1972 Jun; 134(23):1239-43. PubMed ID: 5047539
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cervical cancer screening program of Paraná: cost-effective model in a developing country.
    Bleggi Torres LF; Werner B; Totsugui J; Collaço LM; Araújo SR; Huçulak M; Boza EJ; Fischer RM; De Laat L; Sobbania LC; Raggio A
    Diagn Cytopathol; 2003 Jul; 29(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 12827718
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The cost of health care services provided to women enrolled in a community-based breast and cervical cancer screening program.
    Burack R; Latafa J
    J Health Care Poor Underserved; 2009 Aug; 20(3):713-20. PubMed ID: 19648699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cost-effectiveness of human papillomavirus vaccination in Belgium: do not forget about cervical cancer screening.
    Thiry N; De Laet C; Hulstaert F; Neyt M; Huybrechts M; Cleemput I
    Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Apr; 25(2):161-70. PubMed ID: 19366497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Papanicolaou cervical smears for screening in asymptomatic women.
    Barnes BA
    Prim Care; 1981 Mar; 8(1):131-40. PubMed ID: 6911755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Cost-benefit analysis of the Program for Early Screening of Cervico-uterine Cancer].
    Hernández-Peña P; Lazcano-Ponce EC; Alonso-de Ruiz P; Cruz-Valdez A; Meneses-González F; Hernández-Avila M
    Salud Publica Mex; 1997; 39(4):379-87. PubMed ID: 9381251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Impact of a federally funded cervical cancer screening program on reducing mortality in New Jersey.
    Miller ER; Miller A
    Prog Clin Biol Res; 1984; 156():313-28. PubMed ID: 6473441
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Prevention of cervical cancer with screening programme in Branicevo District and cost-effectiveness analysis adjusted to the territory of the Republic of Serbia.
    Perovic S
    J BUON; 2009; 14(1):93-6. PubMed ID: 19373953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Collecting direct non-health care and time cost data: application to screening and diagnosis of cervical cancer.
    Cantor SB; Levy LB; Cárdenas-Turanzas M; Basen-Engquist K; Le T; Beck JR; Follen M
    Med Decis Making; 2006; 26(3):265-72. PubMed ID: 16751325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cost-effectiveness of organized versus opportunistic cervical cytology screening in Hong Kong.
    Kim JJ; Leung GM; Woo PP; Goldie SJ
    J Public Health (Oxf); 2004 Jun; 26(2):130-7. PubMed ID: 15284314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Patterns of cervical cancer risk in Kentucky.
    Hopenhayn C; Tucker T; Christian A; Christian WJ
    J Ky Med Assoc; 2007 May; 105(5):205-8. PubMed ID: 17566462
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.