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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1627374)

  • 21. Descriptive terms for mammographic abnormalities: observer variation in application. The Northern Region Breast Screening Radiology Audit Group.
    Simpson W; Neilson F; Kelly PJ
    Clin Radiol; 1996 Oct; 51(10):709-13. PubMed ID: 8893641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Inter-reader Variability in the Use of BI-RADS Descriptors for Suspicious Findings on Diagnostic Mammography: A Multi-institution Study of 10 Academic Radiologists.
    Lee AY; Wisner DJ; Aminololama-Shakeri S; Arasu VA; Feig SA; Hargreaves J; Ojeda-Fournier H; Bassett LW; Wells CJ; De Guzman J; Flowers CI; Campbell JE; Elson SL; Retallack H; Joe BN
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):60-66. PubMed ID: 27793579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Inter-observer variability in the interpretation of mammograms.
    Vineis P; Sinistrero G; Temporelli A; Azzoni L; Bigo A; Burke P; Ciccone G; Fasciano F; Ferraris R; Frigerio A
    Tumori; 1988 Jun; 74(3):275-9. PubMed ID: 3400118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The role of the reference radiologist. Estimates of inter-observer agreement and potential delay in cancer detection in the national breast screening study.
    Baines CJ; McFarlane DV; Miller AB
    Invest Radiol; 1990 Sep; 25(9):971-6. PubMed ID: 2211054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Career caseload predicts interobserver agreement on the final classification of a mammogram.
    Abdelrahman MA; Rawashdeh MA; McEntee M; Abu Tahoun L; Brennan P
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2019 Apr; 63(2):197-202. PubMed ID: 30706631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--observer performance study.
    Skaane P; Balleyguier C; Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Piguet JC; Young K; Niklason LT
    Radiology; 2005 Oct; 237(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 16100086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience.
    Destounis SV; DiNitto P; Logan-Young W; Bonaccio E; Zuley ML; Willison KM
    Radiology; 2004 Aug; 232(2):578-84. PubMed ID: 15229350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Inter-observer agreement according to three methods of evaluating mammographic density and parenchymal pattern in a case control study: impact on relative risk of breast cancer.
    Winkel RR; von Euler-Chelpin M; Nielsen M; Diao P; Nielsen MB; Uldall WY; Vejborg I
    BMC Cancer; 2015 Apr; 15():274. PubMed ID: 25884160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Reader characteristics and mammogram features associated with breast imaging reporting scores.
    Trieu PDY; Lewis SJ; Li T; Ho K; Tapia KA; Brennan PC
    Br J Radiol; 2020 Oct; 93(1114):20200363. PubMed ID: 32730088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.
    Henderson LM; Benefield T; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Durham DD; Yankaskas BC; Bowling JM
    Acad Radiol; 2015 Mar; 22(3):278-89. PubMed ID: 25435185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Classification of fatty and dense breast parenchyma: comparison of automatic volumetric density measurement and radiologists' classification and their inter-observer variation.
    Østerås BH; Martinsen AC; Brandal SH; Chaudhry KN; Eben E; Haakenaasen U; Falk RS; Skaane P
    Acta Radiol; 2016 Oct; 57(10):1178-85. PubMed ID: 26792823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Assessment of diagnostic accuracy of mammography carried out for secondary prevention. Results of a test with a sample caseload conducted by 75 Italian radiologists].
    Morrone D; Giorgi D; Ciatto S; Frigerio A; Catarzi S; Rosselli Del Turco M
    Radiol Med; 2001; 101(1-2):44-7. PubMed ID: 11360752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Medical radiologic technologist review: effects on a population-based breast cancer screening program.
    Tonita JM; Hillis JP; Lim CH
    Radiology; 1999 May; 211(2):529-33. PubMed ID: 10228538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison of independent double readings and computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for the diagnosis of breast calcifications.
    Jiang Y; Nishikawa RM; Schmidt RA; Metz CE
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Jan; 13(1):84-94. PubMed ID: 16399036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description.
    Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Floyd CE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Apr; 166(4):773-8. PubMed ID: 8610547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Inter-observer variability in mammographic density assessment using Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) synoptic scales.
    Damases CN; Mello-Thoms C; McEntee MF
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2016 Jun; 60(3):329-36. PubMed ID: 27059785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. Observer Variability of the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Lexicon for Mammography.
    Adibelli ZH; Ergenc R; Oztekin O; Ecevit S; Unal G; Abal Y
    Breast Care (Basel); 2010 Mar; 5(1):11-16. PubMed ID: 22619635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.