268 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11517043)
41. Analysis of mammographic diagnostic errors in breast clinic.
Palazzetti V; Guidi F; Ottaviani L; Valeri G; Baldassarre S; Giuseppetti GM
Radiol Med; 2016 Nov; 121(11):828-833. PubMed ID: 27372707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Influence of review design on percentages of missed interval breast cancers: retrospective study of interval cancers in a population-based screening program.
Hofvind S; Skaane P; Vitak B; Wang H; Thoresen S; Eriksen L; Bjørndal H; Braaten A; Bjurstam N
Radiology; 2005 Nov; 237(2):437-43. PubMed ID: 16244251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Pathologic findings from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: population-based outcomes in women undergoing biopsy after screening mammography.
Weaver DL; Rosenberg RD; Barlow WE; Ichikawa L; Carney PA; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Geller BM; Key CR; Maygarden SJ; Ballard-Barbash R
Cancer; 2006 Feb; 106(4):732-42. PubMed ID: 16411214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Biennial versus annual mammography and the risk of late-stage breast cancer.
White E; Miglioretti DL; Yankaskas BC; Geller BM; Rosenberg RD; Kerlikowske K; Saba L; Vacek PM; Carney PA; Buist DS; Oestreicher N; Barlow W; Ballard-Barbash R; Taplin SH
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Dec; 96(24):1832-9. PubMed ID: 15601639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters.
Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Aug; 99(15):1162-70. PubMed ID: 17652282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. The use of additional imaging increased specificity and decreased sensitivity in screening mammography.
Geller BM; Vacek PM; Skelly J; Harvey SC
J Clin Epidemiol; 2005 Sep; 58(9):942-50. PubMed ID: 16085198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Findings at mammographic screening on only one standard projection: outcomes analysis.
Sickles EA
Radiology; 1998 Aug; 208(2):471-5. PubMed ID: 9680578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Evidence-based target recall rates for screening mammography.
Schell MJ; Yankaskas BC; Ballard-Barbash R; Qaqish BF; Barlow WE; Rosenberg RD; Smith-Bindman R
Radiology; 2007 Jun; 243(3):681-9. PubMed ID: 17517927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Improvement in sensitivity of screening mammography with computer-aided detection: a multiinstitutional trial.
Brem RF; Baum J; Lechner M; Kaplan S; Souders S; Naul LG; Hoffmeister J
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Sep; 181(3):687-93. PubMed ID: 12933460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Breast cancer detected with screening US: reasons for nondetection at mammography.
Bae MS; Moon WK; Chang JM; Koo HR; Kim WH; Cho N; Yi A; Yun BL; Lee SH; Kim MY; Ryu EB; Seo M
Radiology; 2014 Feb; 270(2):369-77. PubMed ID: 24471386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Screening mammography in community practice: positive predictive value of abnormal findings and yield of follow-up diagnostic procedures.
Brown ML; Houn F; Sickles EA; Kessler LG
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Dec; 165(6):1373-7. PubMed ID: 7484568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Radiological review of prior screening mammograms of screen-detected breast cancer.
Hovda T; Tsuruda K; Hoff SR; Sahlberg KK; Hofvind S
Eur Radiol; 2021 Apr; 31(4):2568-2579. PubMed ID: 33001307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Minority report - false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis.
Ciatto S; Houssami N; Ambrogetti D; Bonardi R; Collini G; Del Turco MR
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Sep; 105(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 17115112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Carcinoembryonic antigen immunoscintigraphy complements mammography in the diagnosis of breast carcinoma.
Goldenberg DM; Abdel-Nabi H; Sullivan CL; Serafini A; Seldin D; Barron B; Lamki L; Line B; Wegener WA
Cancer; 2000 Jul; 89(1):104-15. PubMed ID: 10897007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Previous imaging findings of breast cancers that occurred in combined screening negatives.
Han BK; Hahn SY; Ko EY; Shin JH; Kang SS
Eur J Radiol; 2010 Jul; 75(1):e22-8. PubMed ID: 19619968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Consensus review of discordant findings maximizes cancer detection rate in double-reader screening mammography: Irish National Breast Screening Program experience.
Shaw CM; Flanagan FL; Fenlon HM; McNicholas MM
Radiology; 2009 Feb; 250(2):354-62. PubMed ID: 19188311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography in a community practice: are there differences between specialists and general radiologists?
Leung JW; Margolin FR; Dee KE; Jacobs RP; Denny SR; Schrumpf JD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Jan; 188(1):236-41. PubMed ID: 17179372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Do mammographic technologists affect radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretative performance?
Henderson LM; Benefield T; Bowling JM; Durham DD; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Yankaskas BC
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Apr; 204(4):903-8. PubMed ID: 25794085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Breast cancer detection rate: designing imaging trials to demonstrate improvements.
Jiang Y; Miglioretti DL; Metz CE; Schmidt RA
Radiology; 2007 May; 243(2):360-7. PubMed ID: 17456866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy.
Smith-Bindman R; Chu P; Miglioretti DL; Quale C; Rosenberg RD; Cutter G; Geller B; Bacchetti P; Sickles EA; Kerlikowske K
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 Mar; 97(5):358-67. PubMed ID: 15741572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
