274 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20851948)
1. Evidence-based advocacy rather than emotion in defense of screening mammography.
Patti J; Lee C
Radiology; 2010 Oct; 257(1):295-6; author reply 296-7. PubMed ID: 20851948
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: the unbalanced view.
Evans WP; Lee CH; Monsees BS; Monticciolo DL; Rebner M
Radiology; 2010 Oct; 257(1):297; author reply 297-8. PubMed ID: 20851949
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. More mammography muddle: emotions, politics, science, costs, and polarization.
Berlin L; Hall FM
Radiology; 2010 May; 255(2):311-6. PubMed ID: 20413746
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines are not supported by the scientific evidence.
Kopans DB
Radiology; 2010 Oct; 257(1):294-5; author reply 295. PubMed ID: 20851947
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Wise words from Drs Berlin and Hall.
Baines CJ
Radiology; 2010 Oct; 257(1):298; author reply 298. PubMed ID: 20851950
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Breast cancer screening: science, society and common sense.
Lyman GH
Cancer Invest; 2010 Jan; 28(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 20001293
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Breast cancer: when and how often to get screened. How do you make sense of conflicting mammography guidelines?
Harv Womens Health Watch; 2013 Oct; 21(2):3. PubMed ID: 24432454
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Image problems. Science, fear and the politics of mammograms.
Speer TL
Hosp Health Netw; 1997 Jun; 71(11):36, 38. PubMed ID: 9189023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Whither scientific deliberation in health policy recommendations? Alice in the Wonderland of breast-cancer screening.
Fletcher SW
N Engl J Med; 1997 Apr; 336(16):1180-3. PubMed ID: 9099666
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The politics of mammography.
McLelland R; Pisano ED
Radiol Clin North Am; 1992 Jan; 30(1):235-41. PubMed ID: 1732930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mammography utilization, public health impact, and cost-effectiveness in the United States.
White E; Urban N; Taylor V
Annu Rev Public Health; 1993; 14():605-33. PubMed ID: 8323604
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Breast density legislation and opportunities for patient-centered outcomes research.
Lee CI; Bassett LW; Lehman CD
Radiology; 2012 Sep; 264(3):632-6. PubMed ID: 22919037
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Correlation is not causation.
Rimer BK
Am J Public Health; 1998 May; 88(5):832-3; discussion 834-5. PubMed ID: 9585761
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A doctor talks about screening mammography.
Robb-Nicholson C
Harv Womens Health Watch; 2010 Feb; 17(6):4-5. PubMed ID: 20429119
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Screening mammography in women 40 to 49 years of age.
Lisby MD
Am Fam Physician; 2004 Nov; 70(9):1750-2. PubMed ID: 15554494
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Comments and response on the USPSTF recommendation on screening for breast cancer.
Ho A
Ann Intern Med; 2010 Apr; 152(8):542-3; author reply 543-4. PubMed ID: 20157107
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Screening mammography and the "r" word.
Truog RD
N Engl J Med; 2009 Dec; 361(26):2501-3. PubMed ID: 19940292
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Mammography screening for women aged 40 through 49--a guidelines saga and a clarion call for informed decision making.
Ernster VL
Am J Public Health; 1997 Jul; 87(7):1103-6. PubMed ID: 9240097
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Harmonizing Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations: Metrics and Accountability.
Lee CS; Moy L; Friedewald SM; Sickles EA; Monticciolo DL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Feb; 210(2):241-245. PubMed ID: 29045178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of screening mammography.
Stout NK; Rosenberg MA; Trentham-Dietz A; Smith MA; Robinson SM; Fryback DG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2006 Jun; 98(11):774-82. PubMed ID: 16757702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
