Cost-effectiveness of pap smear in Kermanshah, Iran

Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 107-110

  Nokiani, Fariba Almassi ^a,b   Akbari, Hossein ^a   Rezaei, Mansour ^a   Madami, Hamid ^a   Agha, Mohsen Emami Ale ^a  

^a KERMANSHAH UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^b KERMANSHAH UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

Author keywords

Cervical carcinoma; Cost; Effectiveness; HSIL; Pap smear

Indexed keywords

EID: 58349110425     PISSN: 15137368     EISSN: 2476762X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bleggi Torres LF, Werner B, Totsugui J, Collaco LM, Araujo SR (2003). Cervical cancer screening program of Parana: Cost-effective model in a developing country. Diagn Cytopatol, 29(1), 49-54.
2. Boronow RC (1998). Death of the Papanicolaou smear? A tale of three reasons. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 179, 391-6.
3. Eddy DM (1990). Screening for cervical cancer. Ann Intern Med, 113, 214-26.
4. Cervical cancer preventation: Cost - effective screening. From Meadscape General Medicine. Http. www. med scape.Com/viewarticle/4088752
5. Dillner J (2000). Cervical cancer screening in Sweden. Eur J Cancer, 36, 2255-9.
6. Evaluation of cervical cytology. Evidence report/Technology Assessment: Number 5. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/cervsumm.Htm
7. Flores Y, Bishai D, Lazacano E, et al (2003). Improving cervical cancer screening in Mexico: Results from the Morelos HPV study. Salud Publica Mexico, 45, 5388-98.
8. Goldie SJ, Gaffikin L, Geremy D, Goldhaber F (2005). Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening in five developing countries. New Engl J Med, 17, 2158-68.
9. Hanselaar AG (2002). Criteria for organized cervical screening programs. Special emphasis on the Netherlands program. Acta Cytol, 46, 619-29.
10. Hsairi M, Fakh fakh R, Ghyoula M, et al (2000). cost effectiveness of cervical cancer screening strategies in Tunisia. Tunis Med, 78, 557-61.
11. Herbert A, Smith JA (1999). Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III and invasive cervical carcinoma. Cytolpathol, 10, 161-70.
12. Hughes AA, Glazner J, Barton P, Shlay JC (2005). A cost effective analysis of four management strategies in the determination and follow- up of atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance. Diag Cytopathol, 32, 125-32.
13. Addis IB, Hatch KD, Berek JS (2007). Intraepithelial disease of the cervix, vagina and vulva. in: Jonathan S Berek. Novak's Gynecology, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 561-85.
14. Mandelblatt JS, Lawrence WF, Gaffikin L, et al (2002). Costs and benefits of different strategies to screen for cervical cancer in less-developed countries. J Natl Cancer Inst, 94, 1469-83.
15. Kim JJ, Wright TC, Goldie SJ (2002). Cost-effectiveness of alternative triage strategies for squamous cells of undetermined significance. JAMA, 287, 2382-90.
16. Le Van Xuan, Le Truong Giang (2006). The cost effectiveness of Pap smear screening services in a developing country. N Engl J Med, 354, 1536-46.
17. Mao C, Balasubra Manian, et al (2005). Should liquid-based cytology be repeated at the time of colposcopy? Obstet Gynecol Survey, 60, 437-8.
18. Moban S, Ind T (2004). Cervical screening in England and Wales: an up date. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol, 16, 491-6.
19. Novoa Vazquez RM (2004). Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening programme in Algarve region, Portugal. Rev ESP Salud Publica, 78, 341-53.
20. Oncins R, Fuente C, Najar M (2001). Descriptive study of cervical intraepithecal neoplasia grade III cases in the area of the hospital of Barbastro. Aten - Primaria, 28, 457-62.
21. O'Meara AT (2002). Present standards for cervical cancer screening. Curr Opin Oncol, 14, 505-11.
22. Sasieni P, Castanon A (2006). Call and recall cervical screening programme: screening interval and age limits. Curr Diagn Pathol, 12, 114-26.
23. Patro BK, Nongkynrih B (2007). Review of screening and preventive strategies for cervical cancer in India. Ind J Pub Hlth, 51, 216-21.
24. Shingleton HM, Patrick RL, Johnston WW, et al (1995). The current status of the Papanicolaou smear. CA Cancer J Clin, 45, 305-20.
25. Suba EJ, Nguyen CH, Nguyen BD, et al (2001). De novo establishment and cost-effectiveness of Papanicolaou cytology screening services in the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Cancer, 91, 928-39.
26. van den Akker-van Marle ME, van Ballegoo MJ, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al (2002). Cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer screening: comparison of screening policies. J Natl Cancer Inst, 94, 193-203.
27. Zappa M, Cecchini S, Ciatto S, et al (1998). Measurement of the cost of screening for cervical cancer in the district of Florence, Italy. Tumori, 84, 631-5.