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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

361 related items for PubMed ID: 16768956

  • 1. [Screening for cervical cancer in the county of Funen. Status of 25 years of development and experiences].
    Hølund B, Grinsted P.
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2006 May 29; 168(22):2163-6. PubMed ID: 16768956
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Effect of organized screening on incidence and mortality of cervical cancer in Denmark.
    Lynge E, Madsen M, Engholm G.
    Cancer Res; 1989 Apr 15; 49(8):2157-60. PubMed ID: 2702657
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. [Cervical cancer after 10 years of nationally coordinated screening].
    Haldorsen T, Skare GB, Steen R, Thoresen SO.
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2008 Mar 13; 128(6):682-5. PubMed ID: 18337847
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Cervical cancer screening programme in Primorsko-Goranska County, Croatia--the results of the pilot study.
    Vrdoljak-Mozetic D, Ostojić DV, Stemberger-Papić S, Janković S, Glibotić-Kresina H, Brncić-Fischer A, Benić-Salamon K.
    Coll Antropol; 2010 Mar 13; 34(1):225-32. PubMed ID: 20437641
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Effective cervical cytology screening programmes in middle-income countries: the Chilean experience.
    Sepúlveda C, Prado R.
    Cancer Detect Prev; 2005 Mar 13; 29(5):405-11. PubMed ID: 16188399
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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 13; 26(2):130-7. PubMed ID: 15284314
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. [The significance of organized screening for uterine cervix cancer in Denmark during 1968-1987].
    Lynge E, Engholm G, Madsen M.
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1992 May 04; 154(19):1330-4. PubMed ID: 1598705
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. A screening programme for cervical cancer that worked.
    Hakama M, Louhivuori K.
    Cancer Surv; 1988 May 04; 7(3):403-16. PubMed ID: 3242792
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. [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 10; 117(18):2613-5. PubMed ID: 9324815
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. [Follow-up of non-negative cervical cytological smears in the county of Funen].
    Dahl MB, Hølund B, Sørensen B, Ahrons S, Grinsted P, Poulsen EF.
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1998 Sep 28; 160(40):5798-801. PubMed ID: 9782760
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. [The 1996 revision of the Dutch cervical cancer screening programme: increased coverage, fewer repeat smears and less opportunistic screening].
    Berkers LM, van Ballegooijen M, van Kemenade FJ, Rebolj M, Essink-Bot ML, Helmerhorst TJ, Habbema JD.
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2007 Jun 09; 151(23):1288-94. PubMed ID: 17624160
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. [Status of preventive examinations against uterine cervix cancer in Denmark].
    Lynge E, Arffmann E, Hansen KC, Henriksen B, Holten IW, Hølund B, Jespersen NB, Lindsø R, Olesen F, Poll P.
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1992 May 04; 154(19):1339-42. PubMed ID: 1598707
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low- and middle-income developing countries.
    Sankaranarayanan R, Budukh AM, Rajkumar R.
    Bull World Health Organ; 2001 May 04; 79(10):954-62. PubMed ID: 11693978
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. What happens when organization of cervical cancer screening is delayed or stopped?
    Lynge E, Clausen LB, Guignard R, Poll P.
    J Med Screen; 2006 May 04; 13(1):41-6. PubMed ID: 16569305
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. [Two cytological methods for screening for cervical cancer].
    Kirschner B, Simonsen K, Junge J.
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2008 May 26; 170(22):1933-7. PubMed ID: 18513478
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Effect of an antepartum Pap smear on the coverage of a cervical cancer screening programme: a population-based prospective study.
    Nygård M, Daltveit AK, Thoresen SO, Nygård JF.
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2007 Jan 23; 7():10. PubMed ID: 17244348
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. [Status of preventive screening for uterine cervix cancer in Denmark in 1994].
    Lynge E, Arffmann E, Erbs K, Hansen KC, Henriksen B, Holten IW, Hølund B, Jakobsen AB, Jespersen NB, Olesen F.
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1994 Jan 24; 156(4):471-3. PubMed ID: 8140664
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Screening-preventable cervical cancer risks: evidence from a nationwide audit in Sweden.
    Andrae B, Kemetli L, Sparén P, Silfverdal L, Strander B, Ryd W, Dillner J, Törnberg S.
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 May 07; 100(9):622-9. PubMed ID: 18445828
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Cervical cancer screening: A Slovenian experience.
    Primic-Zakelj M, Repse-Fokter A.
    Coll Antropol; 2007 Apr 07; 31 Suppl 2():23-6. PubMed ID: 17600934
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Prevalence of self-reported cervical cancer screening and impact on cervical cancer mortality in Austria.
    Vutuc C, Haidinger G, Waldhoer T, Ahmad F, Breitenecker G.
    Wien Klin Wochenschr; 1999 May 07; 111(9):354-9. PubMed ID: 10407996
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 19.