FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2100609570> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2100609570 endingPage "146" @default.
• W2100609570 startingPage "142" @default.
• W2100609570 abstract "Objective— To compare the costs of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by two faecal occult blood tests (FOBT)—namely, Hemoccult (guaiac based) and reversed passive haemagglutination (RPHA) tests. RPHA was interpreted according to two positivity thresholds (+ or +/-). Methods— Attenders performed both tests. Subjects with a positive FOBT test were invited to have a complete exploration of the colon. The total costs for every 10 000 screened subjects and costs for each unit of result (screened subject, or patient with adenoma/s or cancer detected) were calculated for both tests. Results— 8353 subjects were enrolled. A total of 2109 repeated screening after two years. RPHA(+ and +/-) showed the highest and RPHA(+) the lowest positivity rate at first screening. The Hemoccult positivity rate was highest at repeat screening. Total costs of screening by RPHA(+ and +/-) were highest as this method had the highest recall rate. Screening by RPHA(+) was the least costly. Costs for each screened subject were highest for RPHA(+ and +/-) and lowest for RPHA(+). Costs for each cancer detected were lowest for RPHA(+) and highest for Hemoccult or RPHA(+ and +/-) in subjects aged > 49 or < 50, respectively. Costs for subjects with detected adenoma/s of > 9 mm were lowest for RPHA(+ and +/-) and highest for Hemoccult. At repeat screening total costs of RPHA(+ and +/-) were lower than at first screening, whereas for each subject with cancer or adenoma/s costs were increased. Conclusions— Our data confirm that screening by RPHA is more cost effective than by Hemoccult." @default.
• W2100609570 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2100609570 creator A5030060533 @default.
• W2100609570 creator A5033566687 @default.
• W2100609570 creator A5033709973 @default.
• W2100609570 creator A5035680757 @default.
• W2100609570 creator A5062485385 @default.
• W2100609570 creator A5086551368 @default.
• W2100609570 creator A5087748113 @default.
• W2100609570 date "1997-09-01" @default.
• W2100609570 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2100609570 title "Cost Analysis in a Population Based Screening Programme for Colorectal Cancer: Comparison of Immunochemical and Guaiac Faecal Occult Blood Testing" @default.
• W2100609570 cites W1998339901 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2003568592 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2046686567 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2062611488 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2078992272 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2079707364 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2118835794 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2125953295 @default.
• W2100609570 cites W2145602937 @default.
• W2100609570 doi "https://doi.org/10.1177/096914139700400306" @default.
• W2100609570 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9368871" @default.
• W2100609570 hasPublicationYear "1997" @default.
• W2100609570 type Work @default.
• W2100609570 sameAs 2100609570 @default.
• W2100609570 citedByCount "39" @default.
• W2100609570 countsByYear W21006095702012 @default.
• W2100609570 countsByYear W21006095702013 @default.
• W2100609570 countsByYear W21006095702014 @default.
• W2100609570 countsByYear W21006095702015 @default.
• W2100609570 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2100609570 hasAuthorship W2100609570A5030060533 @default.
• W2100609570 hasAuthorship W2100609570A5033566687 @default.
• W2100609570 hasAuthorship W2100609570A5033709973 @default.
• W2100609570 hasAuthorship W2100609570A5035680757 @default.
• W2100609570 hasAuthorship W2100609570A5062485385 @default.
• W2100609570 hasAuthorship W2100609570A5086551368 @default.
• W2100609570 hasAuthorship W2100609570A5087748113 @default.
• W2100609570 hasBestOaLocation W21006095701 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConcept C526805850 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConcept C90924648 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConceptScore W2100609570C121608353 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConceptScore W2100609570C126322002 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConceptScore W2100609570C526805850 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConceptScore W2100609570C71924100 @default.
• W2100609570 hasConceptScore W2100609570C90924648 @default.
• W2100609570 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2100609570 hasLocation W21006095701 @default.
• W2100609570 hasLocation W21006095702 @default.
• W2100609570 hasOpenAccess W2100609570 @default.
• W2100609570 hasPrimaryLocation W21006095701 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W196187324 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2075214100 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2155078208 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2326463105 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2381416288 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2388808113 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2392730113 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2783552007 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W2949011490 @default.
• W2100609570 hasRelatedWork W3004259476 @default.
• W2100609570 hasVolume "4" @default.
• W2100609570 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2100609570 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2100609570 magId "2100609570" @default.
• W2100609570 workType "article" @default.