212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6911755)
21. Cancer screening for the primary care physician.
Ashkar K; Bulbul M; Sharara A; Hourani M; Hamadeh GN
J Med Liban; 2001; 49(5):298-302. PubMed ID: 12243426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Effective cervical cytology screening programmes in middle-income countries: the Chilean experience.
Sepúlveda C; Prado R
Cancer Detect Prev; 2005; 29(5):405-11. PubMed ID: 16188399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. 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]
25. Cost effectiveness of population screening and rescreening for cervical cancer in the Netherlands.
Boon ME; de Graaff Guilloud JC
Acta Cytol; 1981; 25(5):539-42. PubMed ID: 6792845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Clinical and cost implications of new technologies for cervical cancer screening: the impact of test sensitivity.
Hutchinson ML; Berger BM; Farber FL
Am J Manag Care; 2000 Jul; 6(7):766-80. PubMed ID: 11067374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Effect of organized screening on incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in Denmark.
Lynge E; Madsen M; Engholm G
Cancer Res; 1989 Apr; 49(8):2157-60. PubMed ID: 2702657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Clinical inquiries. Should we discontinue Pap smear screening in women aged>65 years?
Curran DR; Stigleman S; Neher JO
J Fam Pract; 2004 Apr; 53(4):308-10. PubMed ID: 15068776
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Cervical cancer screening in a rural population of Zimbabwe.
Thistle PJ; Chirenje ZM
Cent Afr J Med; 1997 Sep; 43(9):246-51. PubMed ID: 9509642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. [Mass screening for cervical cancer. Experiences after 25 years of voluntary screening and 2 years of organized screening].
Thoresen SO; Skare GB; Sandvin O
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 1997 Aug; 117(18):2613-5. PubMed ID: 9324815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Willingness to pay for new Papanicolaou test technologies.
Raab SS; Grzybicki DM; Hart AR; Kiely S; Andrew-JaJa C; Scioscia E
Am J Clin Pathol; 2002 Apr; 117(4):524-33. PubMed ID: 11939725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Economics of screening for cancer of the cervix.
Hicks S; Edwards D
N Z Med J; 1986 Nov; 99(814):916. PubMed ID: 3468422
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Cost-effectiveness of adding human papilloma virus testing to a managed care cervical cancer screening program.
Lonky NM; Hunter MI; Sadeghi M; Edwards G; Bajamundi K; Monk BJ
J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2007 Oct; 11(4):258-64. PubMed ID: 17917570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Awareness of breast and cervical cancer risk factors and screening behaviours among nurses in rural region of Turkey.
Yaren A; Ozkilinc G; Guler A; Oztop I
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl); 2008 May; 17(3):278-84. PubMed ID: 18419631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. [Quality of vaginal smear for cervical cancer screening: a concordance study].
Cendales R; Wiesner C; Murillo RH; Piñeros M; Tovar S; Mejía JC
Biomedica; 2010; 30(1):107-15. PubMed ID: 20890555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Cost-effectiveness of cervical-cancer screening in developing countries.
Suba EJ; Frable WJ; Raab SS
N Engl J Med; 2006 Apr; 354(14):1535-6; author reply 1535-6. PubMed ID: 16598056
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. The current status of the Papanicolaou smear.
Shingleton HM; Patrick RL; Johnston WW; Smith RA
CA Cancer J Clin; 1995; 45(5):305-20. PubMed ID: 7656133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Cervical cancer screening in primary care: issues and recommendations.
Mandelblatt J
Prim Care; 1989 Mar; 16(1):133-55. PubMed ID: 2649899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Papanicolaou smear: can we make a good test better? Technical and interpretive challenges for the practitioner.
Eltabbakh GH; Eltabbakh GD
J Womens Health Gend Based Med; 1999 May; 8(4):469-76. PubMed ID: 10839701
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. [Impulse cytophotometric studies in cytologically suspicious cervical smears].
Krug H; Kühndel K; Ebeling K
Zentralbl Gynakol; 1977; 99(2):65-73. PubMed ID: 848203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
