AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

AJPH First Look, published online ahead of print Dec 28, 2006
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
AJPH.2006.104638v1
97/2/201    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Suba, E. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Suba, E. J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Global Health
Right arrow Health Policy
Right arrow Screening
Right arrow Cancer
February 2007, Vol 97, No. 2 | American Journal of Public Health 201-202
© 2007 American Public Health Association
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2006.104638

LETTER

SUBA RESPONDS

Eric J. Suba, MD

The author is with the Viet/American Cervical Cancer Prevention Project, San Francisco, Calif, and with Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, San Francisco.

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to Eric J. Suba, 1200 El Camino Real, South San Francisco, CA 94080 (e-mail: eric.suba@kp.org).

Because this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

The participants of the Viet/American Cervical Cancer Prevention Project have agreed that research on novel screening approaches in certain low-resource settings may be appropriate, provided that such research is conducted subordinate to, not instead of, the development of Papanicolaou (Pap) screening services in the same settings.1 Opportunity costs, borne by the underserved, are associated with prioritizing research on novel health interventions in any setting where established interventions are feasible but unavailable.2 The debate to which Sherris et al. appropriately refer Journal readers3,4 may be considered part of a larger debate, articulated bluntly by President Jimmy Carter, over whether the Bill . . . [Full Text]






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Public Health Association