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

167 related items for PubMed ID: 25759475

  • 1. Chlamydia screening is not cost-effective at low participation rates: evidence from a repeated register-based implementation study in The Netherlands.
    de Wit GA, Over EA, Schmid BV, van Bergen JE, van den Broek IV, van der Sande MA, Welte R, Op de Coul EL, Kretzschmar ME.
    Sex Transm Infect; 2015 Sep; 91(6):423-9. PubMed ID: 25759475
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Systematic screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: estimating cost-effectiveness using dynamic modeling and Dutch data.
    de Vries R, van Bergen JE, de Jong-van den Berg LT, Postma MJ, PILOT-CT Study Group.
    Value Health; 2006 Sep; 9(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 16441519
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. The cost and cost-effectiveness of opportunistic screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in Ireland.
    Gillespie P, O'Neill C, Adams E, Turner K, O'Donovan D, Brugha R, Vaughan D, O'Connell E, Cormican M, Balfe M, Coleman C, Fitzgerald M, Fleming C.
    Sex Transm Infect; 2012 Apr; 88(3):222-8. PubMed ID: 22213681
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Cost-utility of repeated screening for Chlamydia trachomatis.
    de Vries R, van Bergen JE, de Jong-van den Berg LT, Postma MJ, PILOT-CT study group.
    Value Health; 2008 Apr; 11(2):272-4. PubMed ID: 18380639
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. The program cost and cost-effectiveness of screening men for Chlamydia to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease in women.
    Gift TL, Gaydos CA, Kent CK, Marrazzo JM, Rietmeijer CA, Schillinger JA, Dunne EF.
    Sex Transm Dis; 2008 Nov; 35(11 Suppl):S66-75. PubMed ID: 18830137
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis in sexually active population of Amsterdam. II. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening women].
    Postma MJ, Welte R, van den Hoek JA, van Doornum GJ, Coutinho RA, Jager JC.
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 Mar 27; 143(13):677-81. PubMed ID: 10321301
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in women 15 to 29 years of age: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
    Hu D, Hook EW, Goldie SJ.
    Ann Intern Med; 2004 Oct 05; 141(7):501-13. PubMed ID: 15466767
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in Dutch pregnant women.
    Rours GI, Smith-Norowitz TA, Ditkowsky J, Hammerschlag MR, Verkooyen RP, de Groot R, Verbrugh HA, Postma MJ.
    Pathog Glob Health; 2016 Oct 05; 110(7-8):292-302. PubMed ID: 27958189
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Estimation of the burden of disease and costs of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Canada.
    Tuite AR, Jayaraman GC, Allen VG, Fisman DN.
    Sex Transm Dis; 2012 Apr 05; 39(4):260-7. PubMed ID: 22421691
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. The cost effectiveness of opportunistic chlamydia screening in England.
    Adams EJ, Turner KM, Edmunds WJ.
    Sex Transm Infect; 2007 Jul 05; 83(4):267-74; discussion 274-5. PubMed ID: 17475686
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. An evaluation of economics and acceptability of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infection, in women attending antenatal, abortion, colposcopy and family planning clinics in Scotland, UK.
    Norman JE, Wu O, Twaddle S, Macmillan S, McMillan L, Templeton A, McKenzie H, Noone A, Allardice G, Reid M.
    BJOG; 2004 Nov 05; 111(11):1261-8. PubMed ID: 15521872
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Overestimation of complication rates in evaluations of Chlamydia trachomatis screening programmes--implications for cost-effectiveness analyses.
    van Valkengoed IG, Morré SA, van den Brule AJ, Meijer CJ, Bouter LM, Boeke AJ.
    Int J Epidemiol; 2004 Apr 05; 33(2):416-25. PubMed ID: 15082651
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. [Screening for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infection in pregnancy; cost-effectiveness favorable at a minimum prevalence rate of 3% or more].
    Postma MJ, Bakker A, Welte R, van Bergen JE, van den Hoek JA, de Jong-van den Berg LT, Jager JC.
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Dec 02; 144(49):2350-4. PubMed ID: 11129971
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Epidemiological, social, diagnostic and economic evaluation of population screening for genital chlamydial infection.
    Low N, McCarthy A, Macleod J, Salisbury C, Campbell R, Roberts TE, Horner P, Skidmore S, Sterne JA, Sanford E, Ibrahim F, Holloway A, Patel R, Barton PM, Robinson SM, Mills N, Graham A, Herring A, Caul EO, Davey Smith G, Hobbs FD, Ross JD, Egger M, Chlamydia Screening Studies Project Group.
    Health Technol Assess; 2007 Mar 02; 11(8):iii-iv, ix-xii, 1-165. PubMed ID: 17311735
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Cost-effectiveness of partner pharmacotherapy in screening women for asymptomatic infection with Chlamydia Trachomatis.
    Postma MJ, Welte R, van den Hoek JA, van Doornum GJ, Jager HC, Coutinho RA.
    Value Health; 2001 Mar 02; 4(3):266-75. PubMed ID: 11705188
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. The impact of natural history parameters on the cost-effectiveness of Chlamydia trachomatis screening strategies.
    Hu D, Hook EW, Goldie SJ.
    Sex Transm Dis; 2006 Jul 02; 33(7):428-36. PubMed ID: 16572038
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens.
    van Valkengoed IG, Postma MJ, Morré SA, van den Brule AJ, Meijer CJ, Bouter LM, Boeke AJ.
    Sex Transm Infect; 2001 Aug 02; 77(4):276-82. PubMed ID: 11463928
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. [Opportunistic screening for genital infections with Chlamydia trachomatis in sexually active population of Amsterdam. II. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening women].
    Ruitenberg EN.
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1999 May 08; 143(19):1012. PubMed ID: 10368724
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Cost effectiveness of home based population screening for Chlamydia trachomatis in the UK: economic evaluation of chlamydia screening studies (ClaSS) project.
    Roberts TE, Robinson S, Barton PM, Bryan S, McCarthy A, Macleod J, Egger M, Low N.
    BMJ; 2007 Aug 11; 335(7614):291. PubMed ID: 17656504
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Effectiveness of yearly, register based screening for chlamydia in the Netherlands: controlled trial with randomised stepped wedge implementation.
    van den Broek IV, van Bergen JE, Brouwers EE, Fennema JS, Götz HM, Hoebe CJ, Koekenbier RH, Kretzschmar M, Over EA, Schmid BV, Pars LL, van Ravesteijn SM, van der Sande MA, de Wit GA, Low N, Op de Coul EL.
    BMJ; 2012 Jul 05; 345():e4316. PubMed ID: 22767614
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 9.