240 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8312021)
1. Preliminary results of a general practice based call system for cervical cancer screening in The Netherlands.
Palm BT; Kant AC; van den Bosch WJ; Vooijs GP; van Weel C
Br J Gen Pract; 1993 Dec; 43(377):503-6. PubMed ID: 8312021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Attendance to cervical cancer screening in family practices in The Netherlands.
Hermens RP; Tacken MA; Hulscher ME; Braspenning JC; Grol RP
Prev Med; 2000 Jan; 30(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 10642458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Participation in the Dutch national screening programme for uterine cervic cancer higher after invitation by a general practitioner, especially in groups with a traditional low level of attendance].
de Nooijer DP; de Waart FG; van Leeuwen AW; Spijker WW
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2005 Oct; 149(42):2339-43. PubMed ID: 16261714
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Uptake of cervical cancer screening in The Netherlands is mainly influenced by women's beliefs about the screening and by the inviting organization.
Tacken MA; Braspenning JC; Hermens RP; Spreeuwenberg PM; van den Hoogen HJ; de Bakker DH; Groenewegen PP; Grol RP
Eur J Public Health; 2007 Apr; 17(2):178-85. PubMed ID: 16837520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Can Flemish women in semi-rural areas be motivated to attend organized breast cancer screening?
Van Hal G; Matthyssen M; Thibaut A; Weyler J
Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique; 1999 Apr; 47(2):119-27. PubMed ID: 10367299
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A primary healthcare-based intervention to improve a Danish cervical cancer screening programme: a cluster randomised controlled trial.
Jensen H; Svanholm H; Støvring H; Bro F
J Epidemiol Community Health; 2009 Jul; 63(7):510-5. PubMed ID: 19228681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cervical screening in general practice: call and recall.
Ridsdale LL
J R Coll Gen Pract; 1987 Jun; 37(299):257-9. PubMed ID: 3129556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Encouraging underscreened women to have cervical cancer screening: the effectiveness of a computer strategy.
Campbell E; Peterkin D; Abbott R; Rogers J
Prev Med; 1997; 26(6):801-7. PubMed ID: 9388791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A large population-based randomized controlled trial to increase attendance at screening for cervical cancer.
Eaker S; Adami HO; Granath F; Wilander E; Sparén P
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2004 Mar; 13(3):346-54. PubMed ID: 15006907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Cervical cancer screening: women's knowledge, attitudes and preferences.
Nicoll PM; Narayan KV; Paterson JG
Health Bull (Edinb); 1991 May; 49(3):184-90. PubMed ID: 1917453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effectiveness of a call/recall system in improving compliance with cervical cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial.
Buehler SK; Parsons WL
CMAJ; 1997 Sep; 157(5):521-6. PubMed ID: 9294390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The efficacy of a national Family Health Services Authority based cervical cytology system.
Amery J; Beardow R; Oerton J; Victor C
Health Trends; 1992; 24(4):119-22. PubMed ID: 10123981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Attendance rate in the Polish Cervical Cancer Screening Program in the years 2007-2009].
Spaczyński M; Karowicz-Bilinska A; Rokita W; Molińska-Glura M; Januszek-Michalecka L; Seroczyński P; Uchlik J; Nowak-Markwitz E
Ginekol Pol; 2010 Sep; 81(9):655-63. PubMed ID: 20973201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Screening for cervical carcinoma.
van Leeuwen AW; de Nooijer P; Hop WC
Cancer; 2005 Oct; 105(5):270-6. PubMed ID: 15937918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. General practitioner based screening for cervical cancer: higher participation of women with a higher risk?
Kant AC; Palm BT; Wentink E; van Weel C
J Med Screen; 1997; 4(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 9200061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Intercultural consultations: investigation of factors that deter non-English speaking women from attending their general practitioners for cervical screening.
Naish J; Brown J; Denton B
BMJ; 1994 Oct; 309(6962):1126-8. PubMed ID: 7987106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Women's perceptions and social barriers determine compliance to cervical screening: results from a population based study in India.
Basu P; Sarkar S; Mukherjee S; Ghoshal M; Mittal S; Biswas S; Mandal R; Sankaranarayanan R
Cancer Detect Prev; 2006; 30(4):369-74. PubMed ID: 16963194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Increasing the uptake of cervical smears: strategies implemented among general practitioners in Auckland.
White GE; McAvoy BR; Gleisner S
N Z Med J; 1993 Aug; 106(962):357-60. PubMed ID: 8255562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Adherence to guidelines on cervical cancer screening in general practice: programme elements of successful implementation.
Hermens RP; Hak E; Hulscher ME; Braspenning JC; Grol RP
Br J Gen Pract; 2001 Nov; 51(472):897-903. PubMed ID: 11761203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
