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.
146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11272962)
1. Mammography screening for older women with and without cognitive impairment. Messecar DC J Gerontol Nurs; 2000 Apr; 26(4):14-24; quiz 52-3. PubMed ID: 11272962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost-effectiveness analysis of a quality-controlled mammography screening program from the Swiss statutory health-care perspective: quantitative assessment of the most influential factors. Neeser K; Szucs T; Bulliard JL; Bachmann G; Schramm W Value Health; 2007; 10(1):42-53. PubMed ID: 17261115 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Continuing screening mammography in women aged 70 to 79 years: impact on life expectancy and cost-effectiveness. Kerlikowske K; Salzmann P; Phillips KA; Cauley JA; Cummings SR JAMA; 1999 Dec; 282(22):2156-63. PubMed ID: 10591338 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Tailoring Breast Cancer Screening Intervals by Breast Density and Risk for Women Aged 50 Years or Older: Collaborative Modeling of Screening Outcomes. Trentham-Dietz A; Kerlikowske K; Stout NK; Miglioretti DL; Schechter CB; Ergun MA; van den Broek JJ; Alagoz O; Sprague BL; van Ravesteyn NT; Near AM; Gangnon RE; Hampton JM; Chandler Y; de Koning HJ; Mandelblatt JS; Tosteson AN; Ann Intern Med; 2016 Nov; 165(10):700-712. PubMed ID: 27548583 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness. Schousboe JT; Kerlikowske K; Loh A; Cummings SR Ann Intern Med; 2011 Jul; 155(1):10-20. PubMed ID: 21727289 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cost-effectiveness of extending screening mammography guidelines to include women 40 to 49 years of age. Salzmann P; Kerlikowske K; Phillips K Ann Intern Med; 1997 Dec; 127(11):955-65. PubMed ID: 9412300 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography. Stout NK; Lee SJ; Schechter CB; Kerlikowske K; Alagoz O; Berry D; Buist DS; Cevik M; Chisholm G; de Koning HJ; Huang H; Hubbard RA; Miglioretti DL; Munsell MF; Trentham-Dietz A; van Ravesteyn NT; Tosteson AN; Mandelblatt JS J Natl Cancer Inst; 2014 Jun; 106(6):dju092. PubMed ID: 24872543 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Sprague BL; Stout NK; Schechter C; van Ravesteyn NT; Cevik M; Alagoz O; Lee CI; van den Broek JJ; Miglioretti DL; Mandelblatt JS; de Koning HJ; Kerlikowske K; Lehman CD; Tosteson AN Ann Intern Med; 2015 Feb; 162(3):157-66. PubMed ID: 25486550 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Incorporating Baseline Breast Density When Screening Women at Average Risk for Breast Cancer : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Shih YT; Dong W; Xu Y; Etzioni R; Shen Y Ann Intern Med; 2021 May; 174(5):602-612. PubMed ID: 33556275 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Breast cancer screening for elderly women with and without comorbid conditions. A decision analysis model. Mandelblatt JS; Wheat ME; Monane M; Moshief RD; Hollenberg JP; Tang J Ann Intern Med; 1992 May; 116(9):722-30. PubMed ID: 1558343 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Toward optimal screening strategies for older women. Costs, benefits, and harms of breast cancer screening by age, biology, and health status. Mandelblatt JS; Schechter CB; Yabroff KR; Lawrence W; Dignam J; Extermann M; Fox S; Orosz G; Silliman R; Cullen J; Balducci L; J Gen Intern Med; 2005 Jun; 20(6):487-96. PubMed ID: 15987322 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Cost effectiveness of the NHS breast screening programme: life table model. Pharoah PD; Sewell B; Fitzsimmons D; Bennett HS; Pashayan N BMJ; 2013 May; 346():f2618. PubMed ID: 23661112 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic versus organised mammography screening in Switzerland. de Gelder R; Bulliard JL; de Wolf C; Fracheboud J; Draisma G; Schopper D; de Koning HJ Eur J Cancer; 2009 Jan; 45(1):127-38. PubMed ID: 19038540 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Higher mammography screening costs without appreciable clinical benefit: the case of digital mammography. Kerlikowske K; Hubbard R; Tosteson AN J Natl Cancer Inst; 2014 Aug; 106(8):. PubMed ID: 25031310 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Mammography Beyond Age 75 Years : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Schousboe JT; Sprague BL; Abraham L; O'Meara ES; Onega T; Advani S; Henderson LM; Wernli KJ; Zhang D; Miglioretti DL; Braithwaite D; Kerlikowske K Ann Intern Med; 2022 Jan; 175(1):11-19. PubMed ID: 34807717 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening in women on dialysis. Wong G; Howard K; Chapman JR; Craig JC Am J Kidney Dis; 2008 Nov; 52(5):916-29. PubMed ID: 18789566 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cost effectiveness of mammography screening for Chinese women. Wong IO; Kuntz KM; Cowling BJ; Lam CL; Leung GM Cancer; 2007 Aug; 110(4):885-95. PubMed ID: 17607668 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Breast cancer screening policies in developing countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis for India. Okonkwo QL; Draisma G; der Kinderen A; Brown ML; de Koning HJ J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Sep; 100(18):1290-300. PubMed ID: 18780864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The Long-Term Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Organized versus Opportunistic Screening for Breast Cancer in Austria. Schiller-Fruehwirth I; Jahn B; Einzinger P; Zauner G; Urach C; Siebert U Value Health; 2017 Sep; 20(8):1048-1057. PubMed ID: 28964436 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]