98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15283894)
1. The science of early detection.
Kramer BS
Urol Oncol; 2004; 22(4):344-7. PubMed ID: 15283894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cancer screening: the clash of science and intuition.
Kramer BS; Croswell JM
Annu Rev Med; 2009; 60():125-37. PubMed ID: 18803476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Population estimates of survival in women with screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancer taking account of lead time and length bias.
Lawrence G; Wallis M; Allgood P; Nagtegaal ID; Warwick J; Cafferty FH; Houssami N; Kearins O; Tappenden N; O'Sullivan E; Duffy SW
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2009 Jul; 116(1):179-85. PubMed ID: 18622697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessing the efficacy of cancer screening.
Jacklyn G; Bell K; Hayen A
Public Health Res Pract; 2017 Jul; 27(3):. PubMed ID: 28765860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effect of length biased sampling of unobserved sojourn times on the survival distribution when disease is screen detected.
Kafadar K; Prorok PC
Stat Med; 2009 Jul; 28(16):2116-46. PubMed ID: 19424959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Early detection of prostate cancer. What do we tell our patients?
Schröder FH; Erasmus MC
Can J Urol; 2006 Apr; 13 Suppl 2():37-42. PubMed ID: 16672127
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Some issues in screening for breast and other cancers.
Duffy SW; McCann J; Godward S; Gabe R; Warwick J
J Med Screen; 2006; 13 Suppl 1():S28-34. PubMed ID: 17227639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Screening for cancer with PET and PET/CT: potential and limitations.
Schöder H; Gönen M
J Nucl Med; 2007 Jan; 48 Suppl 1():4S-18S. PubMed ID: 17204716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Nursing intervention and older adults who have cancer: specific science and evidence based practice.
Bourbonniere M; Kagan SH
Nurs Clin North Am; 2004 Sep; 39(3):529-43. PubMed ID: 15331300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Computational methods in medical decision making: to screen or not to screen?
Kafadar K; Prorok PC
Stat Med; 2005 Feb; 24(4):569-81. PubMed ID: 15678410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Avoiding verification bias in screening test evaluation in resource poor settings: a case study from Zimbabwe.
Gaffikin L; McGrath J; Arbyn M; Blumenthal PD
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(5):496-503. PubMed ID: 18827042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reducing the effects of lead-time bias, length bias and over-detection in evaluating screening mammography: a censored bivariate data approach.
Mahnken JD; Chan W; Freeman DH; Freeman JL
Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Dec; 17(6):643-63. PubMed ID: 18445697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. How to anticipate the assessment of the public health benefit of new medicines?
Massol J; Puech A; Boissel JP;
Therapie; 2007; 62(5):427-35. PubMed ID: 18206104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Lung cancer screening: has there been any progress? Computed tomography and autofluorescence bronchoscopy.
Lee P; Sutedja TG
Curr Opin Pulm Med; 2007 Jul; 13(4):243-8. PubMed ID: 17534167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Preventive measures against tuberculosis in working facilities and companies].
Suzuki K; Satou K
Kekkaku; 2007 Mar; 82(3):201-16. PubMed ID: 17444125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Lead time of prostate cancer detected in population based screening for prostate cancer in Japan.
Ito K; Yamamoto T; Miyakubo M; Takechi H; Ohi M; Shibata Y; Suzuki K
J Urol; 2007 Oct; 178(4 Pt 1):1258-63; discussion 1263-4. PubMed ID: 17698107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Estimates of the average strength of natural selection are not inflated by sampling error or publication bias.
Knapczyk FN; Conner JK
Am Nat; 2007 Oct; 170(4):501-8. PubMed ID: 17891729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Patients' anxiety and expectations: how they influence family physicians' decisions to order cancer screening tests.
Haggerty J; Tudiver F; Brown JB; Herbert C; Ciampi A; Guibert R
Can Fam Physician; 2005 Dec; 51(12):1658-9. PubMed ID: 16926946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The naïve intuitive statistician: a naïve sampling model of intuitive confidence intervals.
Juslin P; Winman A; Hansson P
Psychol Rev; 2007 Jul; 114(3):678-703. PubMed ID: 17638502
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Estimating sample size for a randomized clinical trial of lung cancer screening.
Obuchowski NA
Contemp Clin Trials; 2008 Jul; 29(4):466-77. PubMed ID: 18088564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
