103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9930150)
1. The cost-effectiveness of the cytology laboratory and new cytology technologies in cervical cancer prevention.
Raab SS; Zaleski MS; Silverman JF
Am J Clin Pathol; 1999 Feb; 111(2):259-66. PubMed ID: 9930150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cost-effectiveness of the conventional papanicolaou test with a new adjunct to cytological screening for squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix and its precursors.
Taylor LA; Sorensen SV; Ray NF; Halpern MT; Harper DM
Arch Fam Med; 2000 Aug; 9(8):713-21. PubMed ID: 10927709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of costs and benefits of advances in cytologic technology. International Academy of Cytology Task Force summary. Diagnostic Cytology Towards the 21st Century: An International Expert Conference and Tutorial.
Melamed MR; Hutchinson ML; Kaufman EA; Schechter CB; Garner D; Kobler TP; Krieger PA; Reith A; Schenck U
Acta Cytol; 1998; 42(1):69-75. PubMed ID: 9479325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The cost-effectiveness of cervical-vaginal rescreening.
Raab SS
Am J Clin Pathol; 1997 Nov; 108(5):525-36. PubMed ID: 9353091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. De novo establishment and cost-effectiveness of Papanicolaou cytology screening services in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
Suba EJ; Nguyen CH; Nguyen BD; Raab SS;
Cancer; 2001 Mar; 91(5):928-39. PubMed ID: 11251944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Cost-effectiveness analysis for Pap smear screening and human papillomavirus DNA testing and vaccination.
Chen MK; Hung HF; Duffy S; Yen AM; Chen HH
J Eval Clin Pract; 2011 Dec; 17(6):1050-8. PubMed ID: 21679279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cervical cancer screening among HIV-infected women: an economic evaluation in a middle-income country.
Vanni T; Luz PM; Grinsztejn B; Veloso VG; Foss A; Mesa-Frias M; Legood R
Int J Cancer; 2012 Jul; 131(2):E96-104. PubMed ID: 21964797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Setting the target for a better cervical screening test: characteristics of a cost-effective test for cervical neoplasia screening.
Myers ER; McCrory DC; Subramanian S; McCall N; Nanda K; Datta S; Matchar DB
Obstet Gynecol; 2000 Nov; 96(5 Pt 1):645-52. PubMed ID: 11042294
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. De novo establishment and cost-effectiveness of Papanicolaou cytology screening services in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.
Levin CE; Sellors JW
Cancer; 2002 Apr; 94(8):2312-4; author reply 2314-6. PubMed ID: 12001136
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Cost effectiveness of rescreening cervicovaginal smears.
Raab SS; Bishop NS; Zaleski MS
Am J Clin Pathol; 1999 May; 111(5):601-9. PubMed ID: 10230350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Management of women with abnormal cervical cytology: treatment patterns and associated costs in England and Wales.
Martin-Hirsch P; Rash B; Martin A; Standaert B
BJOG; 2007 Apr; 114(4):408-15. PubMed ID: 17378815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Costs and benefits of cervical screening. I. The costs of the cervical screening programme.
Waugh N; Smith I; Robertson A; Reid GS; Halkerston R; Grant A
Cytopathology; 1996 Aug; 7(4):231-40. PubMed ID: 8853969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Prospects for newer technologies in cervical cancer screening programmes.
Hailey DM; Lea R
J Qual Clin Pract; 1995 Sep; 15(3):139-45. PubMed ID: 8528539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cost-effectiveness of 3 methods to enhance the sensitivity of Papanicolaou testing.
Brown AD; Garber AM
JAMA; 1999 Jan; 281(4):347-53. PubMed ID: 9929088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Costs of population cervical cancer screening program in Poland between 2007-2009].
Spaczyński M; Karowicz-Bilinska A; Kedzia W; Molińska-Glura M; Seroczyński P; Januszek-Michalecka L; Rokita W; Nowak-Markwitz E
Ginekol Pol; 2010 Oct; 81(10):750-6. PubMed ID: 21117303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cost-effectiveness of primary HPV screening for cervical cancer in Germany--a decision analysis.
Sroczynski G; Schnell-Inderst P; Mühlberger N; Lang K; Aidelsburger P; Wasem J; Mittendorf T; Engel J; Hillemanns P; Petry KU; Krämer A; Siebert U
Eur J Cancer; 2011 Jul; 47(11):1633-46. PubMed ID: 21482103
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cost-Effectiveness of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Testing With Messenger RNA Versus DNA Under United States Guidelines for Cervical Cancer Screening.
Ting J; Smith JS; Myers ER
J Low Genit Tract Dis; 2015 Oct; 19(4):333-9. PubMed ID: 26225945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The costs and effects of cervical and breast cancer screening in a public hospital emergency room. The Cancer Control Center of Harlem.
Mandelblatt J; Freeman H; Winczewski D; Cagney K; Williams S; Trowers R; Tang J; Gold K; Lin TH; Kerner J
Am J Public Health; 1997 Jul; 87(7):1182-9. PubMed ID: 9240110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
