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.
44 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2143940)
1. Radiologists and mammography: practice makes perfect. Ominsky SH; Sicles EA; Sollitto RA; Galvin HG Oncology (Williston Park); 1990 Jul; 4(7):40, 42. PubMed ID: 2143940 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Controversies in mammography. Timins JK N J Med; 2005; 102(1-2):45-9. PubMed ID: 15790065 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Mammography in general practice]. Schwarz-Hofer E; Stauber R Wien Med Wochenschr; 1977 Nov; 127(22):688-91. PubMed ID: 595611 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Mammography screening in women 40 to 49 years old. Léger MM; McNellis R; JAAPA; 2007 Nov; 20(11):16, 18. PubMed ID: 18035758 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Digital mammography image quality: image display. Siegel E; Krupinski E; Samei E; Flynn M; Andriole K; Erickson B; Thomas J; Badano A; Seibert JA; Pisano ED J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Aug; 3(8):615-27. PubMed ID: 17412136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Proficiency test in clinical mammography. Results of a consecutive series of 130 volunteer Italian radiologists]. Ciatto S; Andreoli C; Di Maggio C Radiol Med; 1999 Oct; 98(4):255-8. PubMed ID: 10615363 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Critical remarks on mammography]. Thiel E Radiol Diagn (Berl); 1975; 16(6):818-24. PubMed ID: 1228816 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Storage, transmission, and retrieval of digital mammography, including recommendations on image compression. Avrin D; Morin R; Piraino D; Rowberg A; Detorie N; Zuley M; Seibert JA; Pisano ED J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Aug; 3(8):609-14. PubMed ID: 17412135 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Recent controversies in mammography screening for breast cancer. McTiernan A Medscape Womens Health; 2002; 7(2):3. PubMed ID: 12142859 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. How knowledgeable are healthcare personnel about breast cancer? Akan A; Günyel V Breast J; 2008; 14(4):406-7. PubMed ID: 18540956 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Findings from a national sample. Beam CA; Layde PM; Sullivan DC Arch Intern Med; 1996 Jan; 156(2):209-13. PubMed ID: 8546556 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. How to accredit your practice for stereotactic biopsies. Dershaw DD Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1998 Nov; 20(11):127-8, 131. PubMed ID: 10344857 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Breast cancer screening in an aging population. Caplan LS Adm Radiol J; 1998; 17(9-10):8-11. PubMed ID: 10345955 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Computer-aided mammography: a case study of coping with fallibility in a skilled decision-making task. Hartswood M; Procter R Top Health Inf Manage; 2000 May; 20(4):38-54. PubMed ID: 10977141 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Preliminary report of an intervention to improve mammography skills of radiologists. D'Orsi CJ; Karellas A; Costanza ME; Gaw VP Prog Clin Biol Res; 1989; 293():151-7. PubMed ID: 2726930 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Full-field digital mammography. A candid assessment. Lewin JM Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1999 Sep; 21(9):40-5. PubMed ID: 10623316 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Breast cancer screening: recommendations and controversies. Saghir NS; Bikhazi K; Salem Z; Ashkar K; Adib S; Issa P J Med Liban; 1997 Dec; 45(4):206-11. PubMed ID: 9747011 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Better care for breast cancer. Zablocki E HMO; 1995; 36(4):64-9. PubMed ID: 10166489 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing accuracy of mammography in the presence of verification bias and intrareader correlation. Zheng Y; Barlow WE; Cutter G Biometrics; 2005 Mar; 61(1):259-68. PubMed ID: 15737102 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]