151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17412133)
1. Technology evaluation center assessment synopsis: full-field digital mammography.
Rothenberg BM; Ziegler KM; Aronson N
J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Aug; 3(8):586-8. PubMed ID: 17412133
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Follow-up and final results of the Oslo I Study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading.
Skaane P; Skjennald A; Young K; Egge E; Jebsen I; Sager EM; Scheel B; Søvik E; Ertzaas AK; Hofvind S; Abdelnoor M
Acta Radiol; 2005 Nov; 46(7):679-89. PubMed ID: 16372686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Breast cancer: missed interval and screening-detected cancer at full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography-- results from a retrospective review.
Hoff SR; Abrahamsen AL; Samset JH; Vigeland E; Klepp O; Hofvind S
Radiology; 2012 Aug; 264(2):378-86. PubMed ID: 22700555
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations.
Lewin JM; Hendrick RE; D'Orsi CJ; Isaacs PK; Moss LJ; Karellas A; Sisney GA; Kuni CC; Cutter GR
Radiology; 2001 Mar; 218(3):873-80. PubMed ID: 11230669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and final results of Oslo II study.
Skaane P; Hofvind S; Skjennald A
Radiology; 2007 Sep; 244(3):708-17. PubMed ID: 17709826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program--the Oslo II Study.
Skaane P; Skjennald A
Radiology; 2004 Jul; 232(1):197-204. PubMed ID: 15155893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact of the transition from screen-film to digital screening mammography on interval cancer characteristics and treatment - a population based study from the Netherlands.
Nederend J; Duijm LE; Louwman MW; Coebergh JW; Roumen RM; Lohle PN; Roukema JA; Rutten MJ; van Steenbergen LN; Ernst MF; Jansen FH; Plaisier ML; Hooijen MJ; Voogd AC
Eur J Cancer; 2014 Jan; 50(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 24275518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography.
van Bommel R; Voogd AC; Louwman MW; Strobbe LJ; Venderink D; Duijm LE
Eur Radiol; 2017 Feb; 27(2):553-561. PubMed ID: 27180183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography in Japanese population-based screening.
Yamada T; Saito M; Ishibashi T; Tsuboi M; Matsuhashi T; Sato A; Saito H; Takahashi S; Onuki K; Ouchi N
Radiat Med; 2004; 22(6):408-12. PubMed ID: 15648457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Studies comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography in breast cancer screening: updated review.
Skaane P
Acta Radiol; 2009 Jan; 50(1):3-14. PubMed ID: 19037825
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mammographic performance in a population-based screening program: before, during, and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital mammography.
Hofvind S; Skaane P; Elmore JG; Sebuødegård S; Hoff SR; Lee CI
Radiology; 2014 Jul; 272(1):52-62. PubMed ID: 24689858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Image quality, lesion detection, and diagnostic efficacy in digital mammography: full-field digital mammography versus computed radiography-based mammography using digital storage phosphor plates.
Schueller G; Riedl CC; Mallek R; Eibenberger K; Langenberger H; Kaindl E; Kulinna-Cosentini C; Rudas M; Helbich TH
Eur J Radiol; 2008 Sep; 67(3):487-96. PubMed ID: 17890036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program.
Karssemeijer N; Bluekens AM; Beijerinck D; Deurenberg JJ; Beekman M; Visser R; van Engen R; Bartels-Kortland A; Broeders MJ
Radiology; 2009 Nov; 253(2):353-8. PubMed ID: 19703851
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact of full field digital mammography on the classification and mammographic characteristics of interval breast cancers.
Knox M; O'Brien A; Szabó E; Smith CS; Fenlon HM; McNicholas MM; Flanagan FL
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Jun; 84(6):1056-61. PubMed ID: 25816990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Moving into the digital era: a novel experience with the first full-field digital mammography system in Malaysia.
Ranganathan S; Faridah Y; Ng KH
Singapore Med J; 2007 Sep; 48(9):804-7. PubMed ID: 17728959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program.
Hambly NM; McNicholas MM; Phelan N; Hargaden GC; O'Doherty A; Flanagan FL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Oct; 193(4):1010-8. PubMed ID: 19770323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparative accuracy in concurrent screening cohorts.
Del Turco MR; Mantellini P; Ciatto S; Bonardi R; Martinelli F; Lazzari B; Houssami N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Oct; 189(4):860-6. PubMed ID: 17885057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study.
Feeley L; Kiernan D; Mooney T; Flanagan F; Hargaden G; Kell M; Stokes M; Kennedy M
J Clin Pathol; 2011 Mar; 64(3):215-9. PubMed ID: 21177749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography in a population-based screening program: The Sogn and Fjordane study.
Juel IM; Skaane P; Hoff SR; Johannessen G; Hofvind S
Acta Radiol; 2010 Nov; 51(9):962-8. PubMed ID: 20942729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study.
Nederend J; Duijm LEM; Louwman MWJ; Groenewoud JH; Donkers-van Rossum AB; Voogd AC
Ann Oncol; 2012 Dec; 23(12):3098-3103. PubMed ID: 22745215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
