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 *

138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12736584)

  • 1. [As always, human quality takes precedence over equipment quality. Reflections on quality assurance of screening mammography and the ineluctable evolution towards digital systems].
    Stines J
    J Radiol; 2003 Mar; 84(3):267-8. PubMed ID: 12736584
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [The quality of mammography scrutinized. Ongoing control mass screenings for breast cancer is necessary].
    Andersson I; Rydén S; Karlberg I
    Lakartidningen; 1995 Aug; 92(35):3106-9. PubMed ID: 7658762
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Confrontation of mammography systems in flanders with the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in mammography screening. Analysis of initial results.
    Bosmans H; Carton AK; Deprez T; Rogge F; Van Steen A; Van Limbergen E; Marchal G
    JBR-BTR; 1999 Dec; 82(6):288-93. PubMed ID: 10670170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Quality assurance in Trent Regional Health Authority's breast screening programme.
    Thornhill P
    Radiogr Today; 1990 Apr; 56(635):11-3. PubMed ID: 2363814
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Central online quality assurance in radiology: an IT solution exemplified by the German Breast Cancer Screening Program].
    Czwoydzinski J; Girnus R; Sommer A; Heindel W; Lenzen H
    Rofo; 2011 Sep; 183(9):849-54. PubMed ID: 21830180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quality control in mammography. Everyone has a role. American College of Radiology.
    Haus A
    Adm Radiol; 1992 Nov; 11(11):123, 125-6, 129-30. PubMed ID: 10123210
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Use of computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) and tele-mammography in preventive breast cancer screening].
    Schneider W; Heinlein P; Drexl J; Gössler A
    Rontgenpraxis; 2002; 54(5):192-8. PubMed ID: 12051081
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Quality assurance of mammographic devices].
    Nowotny R; Semturs F
    Wien Med Wochenschr; 2001; 151(21-23):556-9. PubMed ID: 11762254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Quality assurance in organized screening of breast cancer].
    De Landtsheer JP; Delaloye JF; Lepori D; De Grandi P; Levi F
    Rev Med Suisse Romande; 2003 May; 123(5):283-9. PubMed ID: 15095710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Should mammography screening be promoted if quality assurance is lacking?
    Barmus B
    Public Health Rep; 1993; 108(1):135. PubMed ID: 8434090
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Comment on the contribution by J. Zaers et al. Quality assurance in roentgen mammography].
    Schöfer H
    Radiologe; 1998 May; 38(5):444-5; author reply 447-9. PubMed ID: 9646355
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program.
    Meyer P; Zinninger M; Wilcox P
    Adm Radiol; 1990 Aug; 9(8):27-8, 30, 33-6. PubMed ID: 10106046
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Artifacts in digital mammography.
    Van Ongeval C; Jacobs J; Bosmans H
    JBR-BTR; 2008; 91(6):262-3. PubMed ID: 19203002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mammography. Part 2. Evaluation of equipment and guidelines for quality assurance.
    Zamenhof RG; Homer MJ
    Appl Radiol; 1984; 13(6):51-4. PubMed ID: 10268876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Guideline for the additional test positions according to the EPQC 4th Edition for Digital Mammography Systems].
    Sommer A; Lenzen H; Blaser D; Ehlers SE; Schopphoven S; John C;
    Rofo; 2009 Sep; 181(9):845-50. PubMed ID: 19676011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Assessment of mammographic units in Poland in the view of current requirements of radiation protection regulations].
    Bekas M; Pachocki KA; Rózycki Z; Wieprzowski K; Fabiszewska E
    Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig; 2006; 57(1):81-90. PubMed ID: 16900867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Primary care practice and facility quality orientation: influence on breast and cervical cancer screening rates.
    Goldzweig CL; Parkerton PH; Washington DL; Lanto AB; Yano EM
    Am J Manag Care; 2004 Apr; 10(4):265-72. PubMed ID: 15124503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Regarding trends in recall, biopsy, and positive biopsy rates for screening mammography.
    Ellis RL
    Radiology; 2006 Jan; 238(1):375-6; author reply 376. PubMed ID: 16373783
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A quality assurance programme for mass screening in mammography.
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1989 Dec; 12(4):252-9. PubMed ID: 2610641
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Breast cancer--screening data for assessing quality of services--New York, 2000-2003.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
    MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep; 2004 Jun; 53(21):455-7. PubMed ID: 15175570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.