116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10442132)
1. Carcinoma of the uterine cervix: results of Ka-Ngwane screening programme and comparison between the results obtained from urban and other unscreened rural communities.
Lancaster EJ; Banach L; Lekalakala T; Mandiwana I
East Afr Med J; 1999 Feb; 76(2):101-4. PubMed ID: 10442132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III, and cancer of the cervix uteri following a negative Pap-smear in an opportunistic screening.
Gram IT; Macaluso M; Stalsberg H
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 1998 Feb; 77(2):228-32. PubMed ID: 9512333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III (CIN III) and invasive cervical carcinoma: the yawning gap revisited and the treatment of risk.
Herbert A; Smith JA
Cytopathology; 1999 Jun; 10(3):161-70. PubMed ID: 10390064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Screening for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in north east Scotland shows fall in incidence and mortality from invasive cancer with concomitant rise in preinvasive disease.
Macgregor JE; Campbell MK; Mann EM; Swanson KY
BMJ; 1994 May; 308(6941):1407-11. PubMed ID: 8019250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Cervical neoplasia in pap smears: risk of cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) after negative or no prior smears in a population without a mass screening programme.
Forsmo S; Jacobsen BK; Stalsberg H
Int J Epidemiol; 1996 Feb; 25(1):53-8. PubMed ID: 8666505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Opportunistic testing of medically underserved women for cervical cancer in South Africa.
van Bogaert LJ; Knapp DC
Acta Cytol; 2001; 45(3):313-6. PubMed ID: 11393060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. High-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion in women aged <30 years has a prevalence pattern resembling low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion.
Vale DB; Westin MC; Zeferino LC
Cancer Cytopathol; 2013 Oct; 121(10):576-81. PubMed ID: 23765869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Real-world research on cervical cancer screening program and effect evaluation for Chinese population].
Zhao YQ; Dai Y; Dang L; Kong LH; Zhang Y; Feng RM; Qiao YL; Lang JH
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2018 Oct; 40(10):764-771. PubMed ID: 30392341
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Diagnoses and outcomes in cervical cancer screening: a population-based study.
Insinga RP; Glass AG; Rush BB
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Jul; 191(1):105-13. PubMed ID: 15295350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Feasibility of cytology-based cervical cancer screening in rural Cameroon.
Robyr R; Nazeer S; Vassilakos P; Matute JC; Sando Z; Halle G; Mbakop A; Campana A
Acta Cytol; 2002; 46(6):1110-6. PubMed ID: 12462091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Descriptive study of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III (CIN III) cases in the area of the hospital of Barbastro].
Oncins R; Fuente C; Nájar M
Aten Primaria; 2001 Oct; 28(7):457-62. PubMed ID: 11718640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of depleted uranium weapons used in the Balkan war on the incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and invasive cancer of the cervix in Greece.
Papathanasiou K; Gianoulis C; Tolikas A; Dovas D; Koutsos J; Fragkedakis N; Papathanasiou N
Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol; 2005; 32(1):58-60. PubMed ID: 15864941
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. CIN 2/3 and cervical cancer in an organised screening programme after an unsatisfactory or a normal Pap smear: a seven-year prospective study of the Norwegian population-based screening programme.
Nygård JF; Sauer T; Nygård M; Skare GB; Thoresen SØ
J Med Screen; 2004; 11(2):70-6. PubMed ID: 15153321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 'Pap smear' for screening of precancerous conditions of cervix.
Noreen R; Qudussi H
J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad; 2011; 23(2):41-4. PubMed ID: 24800339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The prevalence of HPV associated cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in women under age 21: who will be missed under the new cervical cancer screening guidelines?
DeCew AE; Hadler JL; Daley AM; Niccolai L
J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol; 2013 Dec; 26(6):346-9. PubMed ID: 24119656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Safety of extending screening intervals beyond five years in cervical screening programmes with testing for high risk human papillomavirus: 14 year follow-up of population based randomised cohort in the Netherlands.
Dijkstra MG; van Zummeren M; Rozendaal L; van Kemenade FJ; Helmerhorst TJ; Snijders PJ; Meijer CJ; Berkhof J
BMJ; 2016 Oct; 355():i4924. PubMed ID: 27702796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reimbursed Costs of Management of Uterine Cervical Lesions in Poland--a Descriptive Analysis of Data from the National Health Fund and the Ministry of Health.
Nowakowski A; Śliwczyński A; Seroczyński P; Cybulski M; Teter Z
Cent Eur J Public Health; 2016 Jun; 24(2):163-8. PubMed ID: 27178030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A mobile unit: an effective service for cervical cancer screening among rural Thai women.
Swaddiwudhipong W; Chaovakiratipong C; Nguntra P; Mahasakpan P; Tatip Y; Boonmak C
Int J Epidemiol; 1999 Feb; 28(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 10195661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Screening histories of women with CIN 2/3 compared with women diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer: a retrospective analysis of the Norwegian Coordinated Cervical Cancer Screening Program.
Nygård JF; Nygård M; Skare GB; Thoresen SØ
Cancer Causes Control; 2005 May; 16(4):463-74. PubMed ID: 15953989
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of primary human papillomavirus cervical screening in England: extended follow-up of the ARTISTIC randomised trial cohort through three screening rounds.
C Kitchener H; Canfell K; Gilham C; Sargent A; Roberts C; Desai M; Peto J
Health Technol Assess; 2014 Apr; 18(23):1-196. PubMed ID: 24762804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
