93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15677889)
21. Are Physicians Influenced by Their Own Specialty Society's Guidelines Regarding Mammography Screening? An Analysis of Nationally Representative Data.
Scheel JR; Hippe DS; Chen LE; Lam DL; Lee JM; Elmore JG; Rahbar H; Partridge SC; Lee CI
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Nov; 207(5):959-964. PubMed ID: 27504599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. 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]
23. Breast conservation surgery without pre-operative mammography--a definite feasibility.
Nadkarni MS; Gupta PB; Parmar VV; Badwe RA
Breast; 2006 Oct; 15(5):595-600. PubMed ID: 16517163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Breast cancer: when and how often to get screened. How do you make sense of conflicting mammography guidelines?
Harv Womens Health Watch; 2013 Oct; 21(2):3. PubMed ID: 24432454
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Delay from symptom to diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer in Washington State and British Columbia.
Katz SJ; Hislop TG; Thomas DB; Larson EB
Med Care; 1993 Mar; 31(3):264-8. PubMed ID: 8450682
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Variations in referral pattern for postoperative radiotherapy of patients with screen-detected breast cancer in the south Thames (east) region.
Goy JC; Dobbs HJ; Henderson S; Humphreys S; Michell MJ
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol); 1998; 10(1):24-9. PubMed ID: 9543611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Total Mastectomy or Breast Conservation Therapy? How Radiation Oncologist Accessibility Determines Treatment Choice and Quality: A SEER Data-base Analysis.
Churilla TM; Donnelly PE; Leatherman ER; Adonizio CS; Peters CA
Breast J; 2015; 21(5):473-80. PubMed ID: 26133235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Physician-reported determinants of screening mammography in older women: the impact of physician and practice characteristics.
Roetzheim RG; Fox SA; Leake B
J Am Geriatr Soc; 1995 Dec; 43(12):1398-402. PubMed ID: 7490393
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Specialty differences and the ordering of screening mammography by primary care physicians.
Taplin SH; Taylor V; Montano D; Chinn R; Urban N
J Am Board Fam Pract; 1994; 7(5):375-86. PubMed ID: 7810354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Changes in management techniques and patterns of disease recurrence over time in patients with breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy at a single institution.
Pass H; Vicini FA; Kestin LL; Goldstein NS; Decker D; Pettinga J; Ingold J; Benitez P; Neumann K; Rebner M; Dekhne N; Martinez A
Cancer; 2004 Aug; 101(4):713-20. PubMed ID: 15305400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The Immediate Impact of the 2009 USPSTF Screening Guideline Change on Physician Recommendation of a Screening Mammogram: Findings from a National Ambulatory and Medical Care Survey-Based Study.
Rajan SS; Suryavanshi MS; Karanth S; Lairson DR
Popul Health Manag; 2017 Apr; 20(2):155-164. PubMed ID: 27564582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Frequency and Determinants of a Short-Interval Follow-up Recommendation After an Abnormal Screening Mammogram.
Pelletier E; Daigle JM; Defay F; Major D; Guertin MH; Brisson J
Can Assoc Radiol J; 2016 Nov; 67(4):322-329. PubMed ID: 27209218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Do general practitioners facilitate the breast screening programme?
Kee F
Eur J Cancer Prev; 1992 Apr; 1(3):231-8. PubMed ID: 1467768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Malpractice and breast cancer: perceptions versus reality.
Berlin L
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Feb; 192(2):334-6. PubMed ID: 19155391
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Variation in management of small invasive breast cancers detected on screening in the former south east Thames region: observational study.
Moritz S; Bates T; Henderson SM; Humphreys S; Michell MJ
BMJ; 1997 Nov; 315(7118):1266-72. PubMed ID: 9390053
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Controversies in monitoring metastatic breast cancer during systemic treatment. Results of a GIM (Gruppo Italiano Mammella) survey.
Bonotto M; Basile D; Gerratana L; Pelizzari G; Bartoletti M; Vitale MG; Fanotto V; Lisanti C; Mansutti M; Minisini AM; Aprile G; De Laurentiis M; Montemurro F; Del Mastro L; Puglisi F
Breast; 2018 Aug; 40():45-52. PubMed ID: 29679936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Physicians' opinions and use of controversial technologies. The case of mammographic screening in Norway.
Kristiansen IS; Natvig NL; Sager EM
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 1995; 11(2):316-26. PubMed ID: 7790174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Reader practice in mammography screen reporting in Australia.
Reed W; Poulos A; Rickard M; Brennan P
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2009 Dec; 53(6):530-7. PubMed ID: 20002284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Survey of Alabama physicians' use of mammography, 1989.
Lorino CO; Green AE; Harris JM
South Med J; 1990 Nov; 83(11):1280-2, 1288. PubMed ID: 2237556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. European transnational ecological deprivation index and participation in population-based breast cancer screening programmes in France.
Ouédraogo S; Dabakuyo-Yonli TS; Roussot A; Pornet C; Sarlin N; Lunaud P; Desmidt P; Quantin C; Chauvin F; Dancourt V; Arveux P
Prev Med; 2014 Jun; 63():103-8. PubMed ID: 24345603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
