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.
45. [Chlamydia trachomatis infections--a time for action?]. Mylonas I; Kirschner W; Weissenbacher T; Gingelmaier A; Weissenbacher ER; Friese K Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2007 May; 132(21):1170-6. PubMed ID: 17506013 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Chlamydia trachomatis prevalence in men in the mid-west of Ireland. Powell J; O'Connor C; O'hlarlaithe M; Saunders J; De Freitas J Sex Transm Infect; 2004 Oct; 80(5):349-53. PubMed ID: 15459401 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Managing genital chlamydia trachomatis infection in Scotland: targeted opportunistic testing or a screening programme? Clutterbuck DJ Health Bull (Edinb); 2001 Nov; 59(6):396-404. PubMed ID: 12661390 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Chlamydia screening would pay dividends. Robinson A Practitioner; 1998 Oct; 242(1591):667. PubMed ID: 10343443 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
49. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. New technologies enable screening to be carried out in schools and the community. Polaneczky M BMJ; 1998 Sep; 317(7159):681-2. PubMed ID: 9758503 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. Commentary: Chlamydia trachomatis screening: what are we trying to do? Peterman TA; Gottlieb SL; Berman SM Int J Epidemiol; 2009 Apr; 38(2):449-51. PubMed ID: 19174542 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. Health economic methodology illustrated with recent work on Chlamydia screening: the concept of extended dominance. Postma MJ; de Vries R; Welte R; Edmunds WJ Sex Transm Infect; 2008 Apr; 84(2):152-4. PubMed ID: 18077610 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. History and features of the Wisconsin Chlamydia trachomatis control program. Addiss DG; Vaughn ML; Hillis SD; Ludka D; Amsterdam L; Davis JP Fam Plann Perspect; 1994; 26(2):83-6, 89. PubMed ID: 8033983 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. Summaries for patients. The cost-effectiveness of screening for Chlamydia in women 15 to 29 years of age. Ann Intern Med; 2004 Oct; 141(7):I29. PubMed ID: 15466762 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. Chlamydia screening in the United Kingdom. Catchpole M; Robinson A; Temple A Sex Transm Infect; 2003 Feb; 79(1):3-4. PubMed ID: 12576603 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. Is it cost-beneficial to screen adolescent males for chlamydia? Alexander ER Am J Public Health; 1990 May; 80(5):531-2. PubMed ID: 2109543 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. Relative cost-effectiveness of different tests for Chlamydia trachomatis. Jackson B Ann Intern Med; 2005 Feb; 142(4):308; author reply 308-9. PubMed ID: 15710968 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]