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 *

77 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20551187)

  • 1. Association between guideline adherence and clinical outcome for patients referred for diagnostic breast imaging.
    Vercauteren LD; Kessels AG; van der Weijden T; Severens JL; van Engelshoven JM; Flobbe K
    Qual Saf Health Care; 2010 Dec; 19(6):503-8. PubMed ID: 20551187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Clinical impact of the use of additional ultrasonography in diagnostic breast imaging.
    Vercauteren LD; Kessels AG; van der Weijden T; Koster D; Severens JL; van Engelshoven JM; Flobbe K
    Eur Radiol; 2008 Oct; 18(10):2076-84. PubMed ID: 18431574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Delayed diagnosis of breast cancer in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; de Koning HJ; Coebergh JW; van Beek M; Hooijen MJ; van de Poll-Franse LV
    Eur J Cancer; 2009 Mar; 45(5):774-81. PubMed ID: 19046632
    [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. [Results from a general training hospital for the implementation of a diagnostic workup for pulmonary embolism according to the Dutch Institute for Health Care Improvement].
    Kamphuisen PW; Jacobs EM; Mol JJ; Rijnders AJ; Ullmann EF
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2002 Nov; 146(44):2083-7. PubMed ID: 12448963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessment of BI-RADS category 4 lesions detected with screening mammography and screening US: utility of MR imaging.
    Strobel K; Schrading S; Hansen NL; Barabasch A; Kuhl CK
    Radiology; 2015 Feb; 274(2):343-51. PubMed ID: 25271857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Mammography and mammary ultrasonography: which examination sequence is preferable?].
    Müller-Schimpfle M; Stern W; Stoll P; Kaiser JW; Claussen CD
    Rofo; 1997 Oct; 167(4):348-54. PubMed ID: 9417262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Second reading of breast imaging at the hospital department of radiology: reasonable or waste of money?].
    Teifke A; Vomweg TW; Hlawatsch A; Nasresfahani A; Kern A; Victor A; Schmidt M; Bittinger F; Düber C
    Rofo; 2006 Mar; 178(3):330-6. PubMed ID: 16508842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer.
    Berg WA; Gutierrez L; NessAiver MS; Carter WB; Bhargavan M; Lewis RS; Ioffe OB
    Radiology; 2004 Dec; 233(3):830-49. PubMed ID: 15486214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Adherence to the guideline 'Triage in emergency departments': a survey of Dutch emergency departments.
    Janssen MA; van Achterberg T; Adriaansen MJ; Kampshoff CS; Mintjes-de Groot J
    J Clin Nurs; 2011 Sep; 20(17-18):2458-68. PubMed ID: 21752129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [The current state of the diagnostics of breast diseases in Lombardy].
    Vergnaghi D; Panizza P; Gozzi G
    Radiol Med; 2000 Nov; 100(5):314-20. PubMed ID: 11213407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Baseline staging tests in primary breast cancer: a practice guideline.
    Myers RE; Johnston M; Pritchard K; Levine M; Oliver T;
    CMAJ; 2001 May; 164(10):1439-44. PubMed ID: 11387916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Diagnostic mammography and sonography: concordance of the breast imaging reporting assessments and final clinical outcome].
    Lorenzen J; Wedel AK; Lisboa BW; Löning T; Adam G
    Rofo; 2005 Nov; 177(11):1545-51. PubMed ID: 16302136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Preoperative assessment of breast cancer: sonography versus MR imaging.
    Hlawatsch A; Teifke A; Schmidt M; Thelen M
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Dec; 179(6):1493-501. PubMed ID: 12438043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Breast imaging: mammography and ultrasonography.
    Bassett LW; Kim CH
    Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am; 2001 May; 9(2):251-71, v. PubMed ID: 11493417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A decade of breast cancer screening in The Netherlands: trends in the preoperative diagnosis of breast cancer.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Roumen RM; de Koning HJ; Plaisier ML; Fracheboud J
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Nov; 106(1):113-9. PubMed ID: 17219049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. The additional diagnostic value of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of breast cancer.
    Flobbe K; Bosch AM; Kessels AG; Beets GL; Nelemans PJ; von Meyenfeldt MF; van Engelshoven JM
    Arch Intern Med; 2003 May; 163(10):1194-9. PubMed ID: 12767956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Analysis of patients with false negative mammography and symptomatic breast carcinoma.
    Murphy IG; Dillon MF; Doherty AO; McDermott EW; Kelly G; O'Higgins N; Hill AD
    J Surg Oncol; 2007 Nov; 96(6):457-63. PubMed ID: 17929256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Assessment of a scoring system for breast imaging.
    Roche NA; Given-Wilson RM; Thomas VA; Sacks NP
    Br J Surg; 1998 May; 85(5):669-72. PubMed ID: 9635819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.