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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17004116)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of double versus single reading of mammograms.
    Brown J; Bryan S; Warren R
    BMJ; 1996 Mar; 312(7034):809-12. PubMed ID: 8608287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. [Modalities of reading of detection mammographies of the programme in the Bouches-du-Rhône. Results and costs 1990-1995].
    Séradour B; Wait S; Jacquemier J; Dubuc M; Piana L
    J Radiol; 1997 Jan; 78(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 9091620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme.
    Blanks RG; Wallis MG; Moss SM
    J Med Screen; 1998; 5(4):195-201. PubMed ID: 9934650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators.
    Otten JD; Karssemeijer N; Hendriks JH; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; Verbeek AL; de Koning HJ; Holland R
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 May; 97(10):748-54. PubMed ID: 15900044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Incremental cost-effectiveness of double-reading mammograms.
    Leivo T; Salminen T; Sintonen H; Tuominen R; Auerma K; Partanen K; Saari U; Hakama M; Heinonen OP
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 1999 Apr; 54(3):261-7. PubMed ID: 10445425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Two view mammography at incident screens: cost effectiveness analysis of policy options.
    Johnston K; Brown J
    BMJ; 1999 Oct; 319(7217):1097-102. PubMed ID: 10531098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cost-effectiveness analysis for breast cancer screening: double reading versus single + CAD reading.
    Sato M; Kawai M; Nishino Y; Shibuya D; Ohuchi N; Ishibashi T
    Breast Cancer; 2014 Sep; 21(5):532-41. PubMed ID: 23104393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Observer variability in cancer detection during routine repeat (incident) mammographic screening in a study of two versus one view mammography.
    Blanks RG; Wallis MG; Given-Wilson RM
    J Med Screen; 1999; 6(3):152-8. PubMed ID: 10572847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.