274 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20456190)
1. Diagnostic performance of breast technologists in reading mammograms in a clinical patient population.
van den Biggelaar FJ; Kessels AG; van Engelshoven JM; Flobbe K
Int J Clin Pract; 2010 Mar; 64(4):442-50. PubMed ID: 20456190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography in a clinical population: performance of radiologist and technologists.
van den Biggelaar FJ; Kessels AG; van Engelshoven JM; Boetes C; Flobbe K
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2010 Apr; 120(2):499-506. PubMed ID: 19418215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Costs and effects of using specialized breast technologists in prereading mammograms in a clinical patient population.
van den Biggelaar FJ; Kessels AG; van Engelshoven JM; Flobbe K
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2009 Oct; 25(4):505-13. PubMed ID: 19845980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: comparison with radiologists' estimates and BI-RADS categories.
Martin KE; Helvie MA; Zhou C; Roubidoux MA; Bailey JE; Paramagul C; Blane CE; Klein KA; Sonnad SS; Chan HP
Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):656-65. PubMed ID: 16857974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS guidelines by community radiologists: concordance of assessments and recommendations assigned to screening mammograms.
Lehman C; Holt S; Peacock S; White E; Urban N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Jul; 179(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 12076896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Evaluation of the results after using of the BI-RADS categories in 1,777 clinical mammograms].
Hauth EA; Khan K; Wolfgarten B; Betzler A; Kimmig R; Forsting M
Radiologe; 2008 Mar; 48(3):281-8. PubMed ID: 17265008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy of assigned BI-RADS breast density category definitions.
Nicholson BT; LoRusso AP; Smolkin M; Bovbjerg VE; Petroni GR; Harvey JA
Acad Radiol; 2006 Sep; 13(9):1143-9. PubMed ID: 16935726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 3 mammograms and the use of stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in a nonacademic community practice.
Mendez A; Cabanillas F; Echenique M; Malekshamran K; Perez I; Ramos E
Cancer; 2004 Feb; 100(4):710-4. PubMed ID: 14770425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists.
Barlow WE; Chi C; Carney PA; Taplin SH; D'Orsi C; Cutter G; Hendrick RE; Elmore JG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Dec; 96(24):1840-50. PubMed ID: 15601640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Computer-aided classification of BI-RADS category 3 breast lesions.
Buchbinder SS; Leichter IS; Lederman RB; Novak B; Bamberger PN; Sklair-Levy M; Yarmish G; Fields SI
Radiology; 2004 Mar; 230(3):820-3. PubMed ID: 14739315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Do mammographic technologists affect radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretative performance?
Henderson LM; Benefield T; Bowling JM; Durham DD; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Yankaskas BC
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Apr; 204(4):903-8. PubMed ID: 25794085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Performance of users in tropical areas with the BI-RADS classification of breast lesions for predicting malignancy].
Gonsu Kamga JE; Moifo B; Sando Z; Guegang Goudjou E; Nko'o Amvene S; Gonsu Fotsin J
Med Sante Trop; 2013; 23(4):439-44. PubMed ID: 24334372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The inter-observer variability of breast density scoring between mammography technologists and breast radiologists and its effect on the rate of adjuvant ultrasound.
Mazor RD; Savir A; Gheorghiu D; Weinstein Y; Abadi-Korek I; Shabshin N
Eur J Radiol; 2016 May; 85(5):957-62. PubMed ID: 27130056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Lesion and patient characteristics associated with malignancy after a probably benign finding on community practice mammography.
Lehman CD; Rutter CM; Eby PR; White E; Buist DS; Taplin SH
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Feb; 190(2):511-5. PubMed ID: 18212240
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An Artificial Intelligence-based Mammography Screening Protocol for Breast Cancer: Outcome and Radiologist Workload.
Lauritzen AD; RodrÃguez-Ruiz A; von Euler-Chelpin MC; Lynge E; Vejborg I; Nielsen M; Karssemeijer N; Lillholm M
Radiology; 2022 Jul; 304(1):41-49. PubMed ID: 35438561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
