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 *

678 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22158996)

  • 1. Dutch digital breast cancer screening: implications for breast cancer care.
    Timmers JM; den Heeten GJ; Adang EM; Otten JD; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ
    Eur J Public Health; 2012 Dec; 22(6):925-9. PubMed ID: 22158996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than non-blinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; de Haan AF; Wauters CA; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
    Eur J Cancer; 2015 Feb; 51(3):391-9. PubMed ID: 25573788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cost-effectiveness of screening women with familial risk for breast cancer with magnetic resonance imaging.
    Saadatmand S; Tilanus-Linthorst MM; Rutgers EJ; Hoogerbrugge N; Oosterwijk JC; Tollenaar RA; Hooning M; Loo CE; Obdeijn IM; Heijnsdijk EA; de Koning HJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2013 Sep; 105(17):1314-21. PubMed ID: 23940285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen April 1991-March 1997. Mammography Screening Evaluation Group.
    Lynge E
    APMIS Suppl; 1998; 83():1-44. PubMed ID: 9850674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Digital mammography screening: weighing reduced mortality against increased overdiagnosis.
    de Gelder R; Fracheboud J; Heijnsdijk EA; den Heeten G; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ; Draisma G; de Koning HJ
    Prev Med; 2011 Sep; 53(3):134-40. PubMed ID: 21718717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Nationwide breast cancer screening fully accomplished; results from the implementation phase 1990-1997. National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening].
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2000 Jun; 144(23):1124-9. PubMed ID: 10876708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Balancing sensitivity and specificity: sixteen year's of experience from the mammography screening programme in Copenhagen, Denmark.
    Utzon-Frank N; Vejborg I; von Euler-Chelpin M; Lynge E
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2011 Oct; 35(5):393-8. PubMed ID: 21239242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Breast cancer screening policies in developing countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis for India.
    Okonkwo QL; Draisma G; der Kinderen A; Brown ML; de Koning HJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Sep; 100(18):1290-300. PubMed ID: 18780864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Screening outcome and surgical treatment during and after the transition from screen-film to digital screening mammography in the south of The Netherlands.
    Weber RJ; Nederend J; Voogd AC; Strobbe LJ; Duijm LE
    Int J Cancer; 2015 Jul; 137(1):135-43. PubMed ID: 25418512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Difficulties in implementing an organized screening program for breast cancer in Brazil with emphasis on diagnostic methods.
    Silva TB; Mauad EC; Carvalho AL; Jacobs LA; Shulman LN
    Rural Remote Health; 2013; 13(2):2321. PubMed ID: 23597169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography screening before the age of 50 in The Netherlands.
    Sankatsing VD; Heijnsdijk EA; van Luijt PA; van Ravesteyn NT; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
    Int J Cancer; 2015 Oct; 137(8):1990-9. PubMed ID: 25895135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Performance goals for an adjunct diagnostic test to reduce unnecessary biopsies after screening mammography: analysis of costs, benefits, and consequences.
    Lee CI; Bensink ME; Berry K; Musa Z; Bodnar C; Dann R; Jarvik JG; Lehman CD; Ramsey SD
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2013 Dec; 10(12):924-30. PubMed ID: 24295942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cost-effectiveness of mammography screening for breast cancer in a low socioeconomic group of Iranian women.
    Barfar E; Rashidian A; Hosseini H; Nosratnejad S; Barooti E; Zendehdel K
    Arch Iran Med; 2014 Apr; 17(4):241-5. PubMed ID: 24724599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Population-based breast cancer screening is not worthwhile. Screening has little effect on mortality].
    Bonneux LG; Autier P
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2011; 155(35):A3774. PubMed ID: 21902850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Impact of a programme of mass mammography screening for breast cancer on socio-economic variation in survival: a population-based study.
    Louwman WJ; van de Poll-Franse LV; Fracheboud J; Roukema JA; Coebergh JW
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Nov; 105(3):369-75. PubMed ID: 17211536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Mammography screening in Germany: how, when and why?].
    Bick U
    Rofo; 2006 Oct; 178(10):957-69. PubMed ID: 17021975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Effects of the population screening into breast cancer].
    Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ; Otto SJ; Frachebou J; Otten JD; Holland R; den Heeten GJ; de Koning HJ
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2013; 157(10):A5218. PubMed ID: 23464582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Socioeconomic inequalities in attending the mass screening for breast cancer in the south of the Netherlands--associations with stage at diagnosis and survival.
    Aarts MJ; Voogd AC; Duijm LE; Coebergh JW; Louwman WJ
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 Jul; 128(2):517-25. PubMed ID: 21290176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Long term breast cancer screening in Nijmegen, The Netherlands: the nine rounds from 1975-92.
    Otten JD; van Dijck JA; Peer PG; Straatman H; Verbeek AL; Mravunac M; Hendriks JH; Holland R
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 1996 Jun; 50(3):353-8. PubMed ID: 8935470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cost-effectiveness of mammography, MRI, and ultrasonography for breast cancer screening.
    Feig S
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2010 Sep; 48(5):879-91. PubMed ID: 20868891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 34.