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 *

36 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1858195)

  • 1. [Mammography screening].
    Petersson B
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1991 Jul; 153(29):2074-5. PubMed ID: 1858195
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Mammography screening].
    Hansen OP
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1991 Nov; 153(45):3157-8. PubMed ID: 1957366
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Predicting the risk of a false-positive test for women following a mammography screening programme.
    Njor SH; Olsen AH; Schwartz W; Vejborg I; Lynge E
    J Med Screen; 2007; 14(2):94-7. PubMed ID: 17626709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mammography screening rates decline: a person-time approach to evaluation.
    Feldstein AC; Vogt TM; Aickin M; Hu WR
    Prev Med; 2006 Sep; 43(3):178-82. PubMed ID: 16675004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Breast cancer screening: recent trends in the use of mammography in Nebraska.
    Rettig B; Nelson N; Faulk R
    Nebr Med J; 1994 May; 79(5):136-8; discussion 139. PubMed ID: 8047188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Breast cancer incidence and mortality in the Nordic capitals, 1970-1998. Trends related to mammography screening programmes.
    Törnberg S; Kemetli L; Lynge E; Helene Olsen A; Hofvind S; Wang H; Anttila A; Hakama M; Nyström L
    Acta Oncol; 2006; 45(5):528-35. PubMed ID: 16864165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Breast screening and statistics].
    Dige U
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2007 Mar; 169(11):1029. PubMed ID: 17378026
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Mammography screening in Germany: how, when and why?].
    Bick U
    Rofo; 2006 Oct; 178(10):957-69. PubMed ID: 17021975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Performance of systematic and non-systematic ('opportunistic') screening mammography: a comparative study from Denmark.
    Bihrmann K; Jensen A; Olsen AH; Njor S; Schwartz W; Vejborg I; Lynge E
    J Med Screen; 2008; 15(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 18416951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Mammography screening].
    Blichert-Toft M
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1991 Aug; 153(34):2367. PubMed ID: 1897055
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Evidence based medicine hit list 2000. Mammography update--sequelae for screening. 1].
    Hamm K
    Radiologe; 2002 Oct; 42(10):M175-8. PubMed ID: 12402118
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evolution of breast cancer screening in countries with intermediate and increasing incidence of breast cancer.
    Wu GH; Chen LS; Chang KJ; Hou MF; Chen SC; Liu TJ; Huang CS; Hsu GC; Yu CC; Jeng LL; Chen ST; Chou YH; Wu CY; Shin-Lan K; Chen TH;
    J Med Screen; 2006; 13 Suppl 1():S23-7. PubMed ID: 17227638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Mammographic screening in the municipality of Copenhagen].
    Dige U
    Ugeskr Laeger; 2002 Apr; 164(16):2177-8. PubMed ID: 11989065
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [600,000 women are examined by mammography per year. Every fifth of them refuses screening].
    Olsson S; Andersson I; Bjurstam N; Frodis E; Håkansson S; Lithander E; Karlberg I
    Lakartidningen; 1995 Feb; 92(6):552-6. PubMed ID: 7853942
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Mammography screening. Breast cancer mortality reduction by one fourth].
    Kreutzkamp B
    Med Monatsschr Pharm; 2005 Sep; 28(9):330-1. PubMed ID: 16163889
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Mass screening for breast cancer?].
    Mikkelsen SO
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1987 Sep; 149(40):2745. PubMed ID: 3451517
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Overdiagnosis, sojourn time, and sensitivity in the Copenhagen mammography screening program.
    Olsen AH; Agbaje OF; Myles JP; Lynge E; Duffy SW
    Breast J; 2006; 12(4):338-42. PubMed ID: 16848843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Re: "Applying recursive partitioning to a prospective study of factors associated with adherence to mammography screening guidelines".
    Radespiel-Tröger M; Hothorn T; Pfahlberg AB; Gefeller O
    Am J Epidemiol; 2006 Aug; 164(4):400-1; author reply 401-2. PubMed ID: 16809428
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Mammographic examinations in Denmark in 1984].
    Pociot F; Storm HH; Lynge E
    Ugeskr Laeger; 1986 Feb; 148(8):471-4. PubMed ID: 3961991
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Screening mammography in the Tampa Bay area: current status and implications for the next decade.
    Clark RA; King PS; Cox CE; Bromley J; Mauer K
    J Fla Med Assoc; 1989 May; 76(5):449-53. PubMed ID: 2614349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 2.