These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

44 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10765629)

  • 21. [Misleading report concerning our work on mammographic screening].
    Gøtzsche PC
    Lakartidningen; 2002 Jan; 99(1-2):75-6. PubMed ID: 11871179
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Women's information needs about ductal carcinoma in situ before mammographic screening and after diagnosis: a qualitative study.
    Prinjha S; Evans J; McPherson A
    J Med Screen; 2006; 13(3):110-4. PubMed ID: 17007650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Influence of mammographic screening on trends in breast-conserving surgery in Ireland.
    Walsh PM; McCarron P; Middleton RJ; Comber H; Gavin AT; Murray L
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 2006 Apr; 15(2):138-48. PubMed ID: 16523011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Quality requirements in mammographic screening in Sweden.
    Leitz W
    Recent Results Cancer Res; 1990; 119():75-80. PubMed ID: 2236865
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Editorial Comment: Barriers and Enabling Factors That Affect Supplemental Screening.
    Niell BL
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2021 Nov; 217(5):1080. PubMed ID: 34499531
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The mammography debate: the senior years.
    Kaniklidis C;
    Curr Oncol; 2016 Jun; 23(3):e162-4. PubMed ID: 27330352
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Response to: "Beyond the mammography debate: a moderate perspective".
    Yaffe MJ
    Curr Oncol; 2015 Oct; 22(5):e401-3. PubMed ID: 26628886
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A comment on the debate on primary prevention.
    Levine M
    J Prim Prev; 1985 Jun; 5(4):276-83. PubMed ID: 24277544
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Comment on Torgeir Bruun Wyller’s debate article].
    Thompson EN
    Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen; 2021 Nov; 141(17):. PubMed ID: 34813221
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Beyond standard mammographic screening: mammography at age extremes, ultrasound, and MR imaging.
    Berg WA
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2007 Sep; 45(5):895-906, vii. PubMed ID: 17888776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Mammographic screening--a comment to the debate].
    Lindberg MJ
    Lakartidningen; 2000 Mar; 97(12):1452. PubMed ID: 10765629
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [A final comment from the National Board of Health and Welfare: women--do attend the mammographic screening! A new group for analysis of the effects is being set up!].
    Rosén M; Rehnqvist N; Stenbeck M
    Lakartidningen; 1999 Apr; 96(15):1883. PubMed ID: 10319656
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Debate among researchers over mammography screening and the potential effect of that debate on screening in the United States.
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Jan; 100(2):156. PubMed ID: 18182608
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Overestimated cost savings by mammographic screening].
    Andersson I
    Lakartidningen; 1996 Aug; 93(32-33):2725. PubMed ID: 8801411
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [SBU does not make statements on mammographic screening without basic data].
    Werkö L
    Lakartidningen; 1996 Jan; 93(3):117. PubMed ID: 8569313
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.