Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 43

1.

Health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness studies in the European randomised study of screening for prostate cancer and the US Prostate, Lung, Colon and Ovary trial.

Miller AB, Madalinska JB, Church T, Crawford D, Essink-Bot ML, Goel V, de Koning HJ, Määttänen L, Pentikäinen T.

Eur J Cancer. 2001 Nov;37(17):2154-60. Review.

PMID:
11677101
2.

Detection of prostate cancer: the impact of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC).

Schröder FH.

Can J Urol. 2005 Feb;12 Suppl 1:2-6; discussion 92-3. Review.

PMID:
15780157
3.

[Cost effectiveness of screening procedures for early detection of prostatic carcinoma: an overview].

Mueller-Lisse UG, Mueller-Lisse UL.

Radiologe. 2002 Aug;42(8):601-7. Review. German.

PMID:
12426737
4.

Economic evaluation of prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen.

Imamura T, Yasunaga H.

Int J Urol. 2008 Apr;15(4):285-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02013.x. Review.

5.

Screening for prostate cancer: a Cochrane systematic review.

Ilic D, O'Connor D, Green S, Wilt T.

Cancer Causes Control. 2007 Apr;18(3):279-85. Epub 2007 Jan 6. Review.

PMID:
17206534
6.
7.

Cost-effectiveness studies in ovarian cancer.

Szucs TD, Wyss P, Dedes KJ.

Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2003 Nov-Dec;13 Suppl 2:212-9. Review.

PMID:
14656283
8.

Health-related quality of life, satisfaction, and economic outcome measures in studies of prostate cancer screening and treatment, 1990-2000.

McNaughton-Collins M, Walker-Corkery E, Barry MJ.

J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2004;(33):78-101. Review.

PMID:
15504921
9.

Screening for prostate cancer.

Schröder FH.

Urol Clin North Am. 2003 May;30(2):239-51, viii. Review.

PMID:
12735501
10.

Update on screening and early detection of prostate cancer.

Otto SJ, de Koning HJ.

Curr Opin Urol. 2004 May;14(3):151-6. Review.

PMID:
15069305
11.

Screening for prostate cancer is neither appropriate nor cost-effective.

Albertsen PC.

Urol Clin North Am. 1996 Nov;23(4):521-30. Review.

PMID:
8948407
12.

Lung cancer screening: will the controversy extend to its cost-effectiveness?

Klittich WS, Caro JJ.

Am J Respir Med. 2002;1(6):393-401. Review.

PMID:
14720026
13.

Repaglinide : a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Plosker GL, Figgitt DP.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(6):389-411. Review.

PMID:
15099124
14.

Liquid-based cytology in cervical screening: an updated rapid and systematic review and economic analysis.

Karnon J, Peters J, Platt J, Chilcott J, McGoogan E, Brewer N.

Health Technol Assess. 2004 May;8(20):iii, 1-78. Review.

15.

Quality of life and economic considerations in the management of prostate cancer.

Turini M, Redaelli A, Gramegna P, Radice D.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(8):527-41. Review.

PMID:
12751912
16.

Screening for prostate cancer: an update of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Harris R, Lohr KN.

Ann Intern Med. 2002 Dec 3;137(11):917-29. Review.

PMID:
12458993
17.

Screening for prostate cancer: an update.

Bryant RJ, Hamdy FC.

Eur Urol. 2008 Jan;53(1):37-44. Epub 2007 Aug 27. Review.

PMID:
17826892
18.

Current status of PSA screening. Early detection of prostate cancer.

Pickles T.

Can Fam Physician. 2004 Jan;50:57-63. Review.

19.

The economic costs of early stage prostate cancer.

Saigal CS, Litwin MS.

Pharmacoeconomics. 2002;20(13):869-78. Review.

PMID:
12381239
20.

Screening for prostate cancer.

Postma R, Schröder FH.

Eur J Cancer. 2005 Apr;41(6):825-33. Review.

PMID:
15808952

Supplemental Content

Support Center