489 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20439838)
1. Performance of first mammography examination in women younger than 40 years.
Yankaskas BC; Haneuse S; Kapp JM; Kerlikowske K; Geller B; Buist DS;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2010 May; 102(10):692-701. PubMed ID: 20439838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: report on the first 4 years of mammography provided to medically underserved women.
May DS; Lee NC; Nadel MR; Henson RM; Miller DS
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Jan; 170(1):97-104. PubMed ID: 9423608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessment of a Risk-Based Approach for Triaging Mammography Examinations During Periods of Reduced Capacity.
Miglioretti DL; Bissell MCS; Kerlikowske K; Buist DSM; Cummings SR; Henderson LM; Onega T; O'Meara ES; Rauscher GH; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Wernli KJ; Lee JM; Lee CI
JAMA Netw Open; 2021 Mar; 4(3):e211974. PubMed ID: 33764423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection.
Lehman CD; Wellman RD; Buist DS; Kerlikowske K; Tosteson AN; Miglioretti DL;
JAMA Intern Med; 2015 Nov; 175(11):1828-37. PubMed ID: 26414882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography.
Ernster VL; Ballard-Barbash R; Barlow WE; Zheng Y; Weaver DL; Cutter G; Yankaskas BC; Rosenberg R; Carney PA; Kerlikowske K; Taplin SH; Urban N; Geller BM
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2002 Oct; 94(20):1546-54. PubMed ID: 12381707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Digital Mammography and Breast Tomosynthesis Performance in Women with a Personal History of Breast Cancer, 2007-2016.
Lee JM; Ichikawa LE; Wernli KJ; Bowles E; Specht JM; Kerlikowske K; Miglioretti DL; Lowry KP; Tosteson ANA; Stout NK; Houssami N; Onega T; Buist DSM
Radiology; 2021 Aug; 300(2):290-300. PubMed ID: 34003059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Performance of Screening Ultrasonography as an Adjunct to Screening Mammography in Women Across the Spectrum of Breast Cancer Risk.
Lee JM; Arao RF; Sprague BL; Kerlikowske K; Lehman CD; Smith RA; Henderson LM; Rauscher GH; Miglioretti DL
JAMA Intern Med; 2019 May; 179(5):658-667. PubMed ID: 30882843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Diagnostic Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
Sprague BL; Arao RF; Miglioretti DL; Henderson LM; Buist DS; Onega T; Rauscher GH; Lee JM; Tosteson AN; Kerlikowske K; Lehman CD;
Radiology; 2017 Apr; 283(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 28244803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effect of radiologists' diagnostic work-up volume on interpretive performance.
Buist DS; Anderson ML; Smith RA; Carney PA; Miglioretti DL; Monsees BS; Sickles EA; Taplin SH; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Onega TL
Radiology; 2014 Nov; 273(2):351-64. PubMed ID: 24960110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Factors Associated With Rates of False-Positive and False-Negative Results From Digital Mammography Screening: An Analysis of Registry Data.
Nelson HD; O'Meara ES; Kerlikowske K; Balch S; Miglioretti D
Ann Intern Med; 2016 Feb; 164(4):226-35. PubMed ID: 26756902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of previous benign breast biopsy on the interpretive performance of subsequent screening mammography.
Taplin SH; Abraham L; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Buist DS; Smith-Bindman R; Lehman C; Weaver D; Carney PA; Barlow WE
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2010 Jul; 102(14):1040-51. PubMed ID: 20601590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of observing change from comparison mammograms on performance of screening mammography in a large community-based population.
Yankaskas BC; May RC; Matuszewski J; Bowling JM; Jarman MP; Schroeder BF
Radiology; 2011 Dec; 261(3):762-70. PubMed ID: 22031709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. [Tailored Breast Screening Trial (TBST)].
Paci E; Mantellini P; Giorgi Rossi P; Falini P; Puliti D;
Epidemiol Prev; 2013; 37(4-5):317-27. PubMed ID: 24293498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK.
Smith-Bindman R; Ballard-Barbash R; Miglioretti DL; Patnick J; Kerlikowske K
J Med Screen; 2005; 12(1):50-4. PubMed ID: 15814020
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Are there racial/ethnic disparities among women younger than 40 undergoing mammography?
Kapp JM; Walker R; Haneuse S; Buist DS; Yankaskas BC
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2010 Nov; 124(1):213-22. PubMed ID: 20204501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities.
Jackson SL; Taplin SH; Sickles EA; Abraham L; Barlow WE; Carney PA; Geller B; Berns EA; Cutter GR; Elmore JG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Jun; 101(11):814-27. PubMed ID: 19470953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effectiveness of computer-aided detection in community mammography practice.
Fenton JJ; Abraham L; Taplin SH; Geller BM; Carney PA; D'Orsi C; Elmore JG; Barlow WE;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2011 Aug; 103(15):1152-61. PubMed ID: 21795668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
