127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12169283)
1. The relevance of reported symptoms in a breast screening programme.
Williams RS; Brook D; Monypenny IJ; Gower-Thomas K
Clin Radiol; 2002 Aug; 57(8):725-9. PubMed ID: 12169283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Performance of a subsidised mammographic screening programme in Malaysia, a middle-income Asian country.
Lee M; Mariapun S; Rajaram N; Teo SH; Yip CH
BMC Public Health; 2017 Jan; 17(1):127. PubMed ID: 28129762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Mammographic screening in women at increased risk of breast cancer after treatment of Hodgkin's disease.
Kwong A; Hancock SL; Bloom JR; Pal S; Birdwell RL; Mariscal C; Ikeda DM
Breast J; 2008; 14(1):39-48. PubMed ID: 18186864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effectiveness of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Compared With Digital Mammography: Outcomes Analysis From 3 Years of Breast Cancer Screening.
McDonald ES; Oustimov A; Weinstein SP; Synnestvedt MB; Schnall M; Conant EF
JAMA Oncol; 2016 Jun; 2(6):737-43. PubMed ID: 26893205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Computer-aided detection output on 172 subtle findings on normal mammograms previously obtained in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening mammography.
Ikeda DM; Birdwell RL; O'Shaughnessy KF; Sickles EA; Brenner RJ
Radiology; 2004 Mar; 230(3):811-9. PubMed ID: 14764891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Observer variability in cancer detection during routine repeat (incident) mammographic screening in a study of two versus one view mammography.
Blanks RG; Wallis MG; Given-Wilson RM
J Med Screen; 1999; 6(3):152-8. PubMed ID: 10572847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Tailored Breast Screening Trial (TBST)].
Paci E; Mantellini P; Giorgi Rossi P; Falini P; Puliti D;
Epidemiol Prev; 2013; 37(4-5):317-27. PubMed ID: 24293498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The effect of hormone replacement therapy on recall rate in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme.
Litherland JC; Evans AJ; Wilson AR
Clin Radiol; 1997 Apr; 52(4):276-9. PubMed ID: 9112944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Incorporation of the technologist's opinion for arbitration of discrepant assessments among radiologists at screening mammography.
Coolen AMP; Lameijer JRC; Voogd AC; Strobbe LJ; Louwman MWJ; Tjan-Heijnen VCG; Duijm LEM
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Aug; 171(1):143-149. PubMed ID: 29730729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Results from 10 years of breast screening in Wales.
Fielder H; Rogers C; Gower-Thomas K; Monypenny I; Dallimore N; Brook D; Greening S
J Med Screen; 2001; 8(1):21-3. PubMed ID: 11373845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Breast screening: What can the interval cancer review teach us? Are we perhaps being a bit too hard on ourselves?
Lekanidi K; Dilks P; Suaris T; Kennett S; Purushothaman H
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Sep; 94():13-15. PubMed ID: 28941754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.
Smith-Bindman R; Chu PW; Miglioretti DL; Sickles EA; Blanks R; Ballard-Barbash R; Bobo JK; Lee NC; Wallis MG; Patnick J; Kerlikowske K
JAMA; 2003 Oct; 290(16):2129-37. PubMed ID: 14570948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Frequency and characteristics of additionally detected ipsilateral breast lesions following recall at screening mammography.
Lameijer JR; Coolen AM; Nederend J; Voogd AC; Tjan-Heijnen VC; Duijm LE
Breast; 2018 Dec; 42():94-101. PubMed ID: 30216838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme.
Blanks RG; Wallis MG; Moss SM
J Med Screen; 1998; 5(4):195-201. PubMed ID: 9934650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Rate of breast cancer diagnoses among postmenopausal women with self-reported breast symptoms.
Aiello EJ; Buist DS; White E; Seger D; Taplin SH
J Am Board Fam Pract; 2004; 17(6):408-15. PubMed ID: 15575032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Interval breast cancers in New South Wales, Australia, and comparisons with trials and other mammographic screening programmes.
Taylor R; Supramaniam R; Rickard M; Estoesta J; Moreira C
J Med Screen; 2002; 9(1):20-5. PubMed ID: 11943793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Screening mammography: value in women 35-39 years old.
Liberman L; Dershaw DD; Deutch BM; Thaler HT; Lippin BS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Jul; 161(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 8517320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Breast cancer screening by mammography in women aged under 50 years in Japan.
Morimoto T; Sasa M; Yamaguchi T; Kondo H; Akaiwa H; Sagara Y
Anticancer Res; 2000; 20(5C):3689-94. PubMed ID: 11268440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
