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 *

91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15044742)

  • 1. Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: effect of arbitration following reader disagreements.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Hendriks JH; de Koning HJ
    Radiology; 2004 May; 231(2):564-70. PubMed ID: 15044742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Arbitration of discrepant BI-RADS 0 recalls by a third reader at screening mammography lowers recall rate but not the cancer detection rate and sensitivity at blinded and non-blinded double reading.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Weber RJ; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; Broeders MJ; Tjan-Heijnen VC; Duijm LE
    Breast; 2015 Oct; 24(5):601-7. PubMed ID: 26117723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The role of arbitration of discordant reports at double reading of screening mammograms.
    Ciatto S; Ambrogetti D; Risso G; Catarzi S; Morrone D; Mantellini P; Rosselli Del Turco M
    J Med Screen; 2005; 12(3):125-7. PubMed ID: 16156942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Introduction of additional double reading of mammograms by radiographers: effects on a biennial screening programme outcome.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; van Ineveld BM; Roumen RM; de Koning HJ
    Eur J Cancer; 2008 Jun; 44(9):1223-8. PubMed ID: 18400488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than non-blinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; de Haan AF; Wauters CA; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
    Eur J Cancer; 2015 Feb; 51(3):391-9. PubMed ID: 25573788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Discrepant screening mammography assessments at blinded and non-blinded double reading: impact of arbitration by a third reader on screening outcome.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; Tjan-Heijnen VC; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
    Eur Radiol; 2015 Oct; 25(10):2821-9. PubMed ID: 25894007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Does computer-aided detection have a role in the arbitration of discordant double-reading opinions in a breast-screening programme?
    James JJ; Cornford EJ
    Clin Radiol; 2009 Jan; 64(1):46-51. PubMed ID: 19070697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Inter-observer variability in mammography screening and effect of type and number of readers on screening outcome.
    Duijm LE; Louwman MW; Groenewoud JH; van de Poll-Franse LV; Fracheboud J; Coebergh JW
    Br J Cancer; 2009 Mar; 100(6):901-7. PubMed ID: 19259088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cost-effectiveness of different reading and referral strategies in mammography screening in the Netherlands.
    Groenewoud JH; Otten JD; Fracheboud J; Draisma G; van Ineveld BM; Holland R; Verbeek AL; de Koning HJ;
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Apr; 102(2):211-8. PubMed ID: 17004116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The pathological and radiological features of screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed following arbitration of discordant double reading opinions.
    Cornford EJ; Evans AJ; James JJ; Burrell HC; Pinder SE; Wilson AR
    Clin Radiol; 2005 Nov; 60(11):1182-7. PubMed ID: 16223614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Detection of bilateral breast cancer at biennial screening mammography in the Netherlands: a population-based study.
    Setz-Pels W; Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Voogd AC; Jansen FH; Hooijen MJ; Louwman MW
    Radiology; 2011 Aug; 260(2):357-63. PubMed ID: 21474705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Double versus single reading of mammograms in a breast cancer screening programme: a cost-consequence analysis.
    Posso MC; Puig T; Quintana MJ; Solà-Roca J; Bonfill X
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Sep; 26(9):3262-71. PubMed ID: 26747264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Dutch digital breast cancer screening: implications for breast cancer care.
    Timmers JM; den Heeten GJ; Adang EM; Otten JD; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ
    Eur J Public Health; 2012 Dec; 22(6):925-9. PubMed ID: 22158996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms.
    Karssemeijer N; Otten JD; Verbeek AL; Groenewoud JH; de Koning HJ; Hendriks JH; Holland R
    Radiology; 2003 Apr; 227(1):192-200. PubMed ID: 12616008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Independent double reading of screening mammograms.
    Ciatto S; Del Turco MR; Morrone D; Catarzi S; Ambrogetti D; Cariddi A; Zappa M
    J Med Screen; 1995; 2(2):99-101. PubMed ID: 7497164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Screening-detected breast cancers: discordant independent double reading in a population-based screening program.
    Hofvind S; Geller BM; Rosenberg RD; Skaane P
    Radiology; 2009 Dec; 253(3):652-60. PubMed ID: 19789229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme.
    Ciatto S; Ambrogetti D; Bonardi R; Catarzi S; Risso G; Rosselli Del Turco M; Mantellini P
    J Med Screen; 2005; 12(2):103-6. PubMed ID: 15949122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.