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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2218198)

  • 21. Estimating mean sojourn time and screening sensitivity using questionnaire data on time since previous screening.
    Weedon-Fekjaer H; Lindqvist BH; Vatten LJ; Aalen OO; Tretli S
    J Med Screen; 2008; 15(2):83-90. PubMed ID: 18573776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Computer-aided system of evaluation for population-based all-in-one service screening (CASE-PASS): from study design to outcome analysis with bias adjustment.
    Chen LS; Yen AM; Duffy SW; Tabar L; Lin WC; Chen HH
    Ann Epidemiol; 2010 Oct; 20(10):786-96. PubMed ID: 20816316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. [Natural history of minimal and occult breast cancers. Long term survival and mass screening].
    Couray J
    Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet; 1992 Nov; 87(11):548-60. PubMed ID: 1480925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The Mayo Lung Cohort: a regression analysis focusing on lung cancer incidence and mortality.
    Strauss GM
    J Clin Oncol; 2002 Apr; 20(8):1973-83. PubMed ID: 11956255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Evaluation of breast cancer service screening programme with a Bayesian approach: mortality analysis in a Finnish region.
    Wu JC; Anttila A; Yen AM; Hakama M; Saarenmaa I; Sarkeala T; Malila N; Auvinen A; Chiu SY; Chen TH
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2010 Jun; 121(3):671-8. PubMed ID: 19890708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Estimates of lead time and length bias in a breast cancer screening program.
    Shwartz M
    Cancer; 1980 Aug; 46(4):844-51. PubMed ID: 7397650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Life expectancy benefits of cancer screening in the end-stage renal disease population.
    LeBrun CJ; Diehl LF; Abbott KC; Welch PG; Yuan CM
    Am J Kidney Dis; 2000 Feb; 35(2):237-43. PubMed ID: 10676722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Conditioned life tables from registries with unidentified random losses.
    Tallis GM; Leppard P; O'Neill TJ
    Stat Med; 1993 Apr; 12(8):767-75. PubMed ID: 8516593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Screening status, tumour subtype, and breast cancer survival: a national population-based analysis.
    O'Brien KM; Mooney T; Fitzpatrick P; Sharp L
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Nov; 172(1):133-142. PubMed ID: 30006795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Immortal Time Bias in Observational Studies of Time-to-Event Outcomes: Assessing Effects of Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy Using the National Cancer Database.
    Agarwal P; Moshier E; Ru M; Ohri N; Ennis R; Rosenzweig K; Mazumdar M
    Cancer Control; 2018; 25(1):1073274818789355. PubMed ID: 30021466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Statistical methods for incomplete data: Some results on model misspecification.
    McIsaac M; Cook RJ
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2017 Feb; 26(1):248-267. PubMed ID: 25063681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Role of detection method in predicting breast cancer survival: analysis of randomized screening trials.
    Shen Y; Yang Y; Inoue LY; Munsell MF; Miller AB; Berry DA
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 Aug; 97(16):1195-203. PubMed ID: 16106024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. An analysis of survival differences between clinically and screen-detected cancer patients.
    Habbema JD; van Oortmarssen GJ; van Putten DJ
    Stat Med; 1983; 2(2):279-85. PubMed ID: 6648143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of study methods and biases on estimates of invasive breast cancer overdetection with mammography screening: a systematic review.
    Biesheuvel C; Barratt A; Howard K; Houssami N; Irwig L
    Lancet Oncol; 2007 Dec; 8(12):1129-1138. PubMed ID: 18054882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. On the benefits and harms of screening for breast cancer.
    Gøtzsche PC
    Int J Epidemiol; 2004 Feb; 33(1):56-64; discussion 69-73. PubMed ID: 15075145
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Measuring effectiveness of lung cancer screening: from consensus to controversy and back.
    Strauss GM
    Chest; 1997 Oct; 112(4 Suppl):216S-228S. PubMed ID: 9337293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Assessing the effectiveness of a cancer screening test in the presence of another screening modality.
    Chubak J; Hubbard RA; Johnson E; Kamineni A; Rutter CM
    J Med Screen; 2015 Jun; 22(2):69-75. PubMed ID: 25492942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Incidence and mortality from breast cancer in the Mama Program for Breast Screening in Finland, 1973-1986.
    Gastrin G; Miller AB; To T; Aronson KJ; Wall C; Hakama M; Louhivuori K; Pukkala E
    Cancer; 1994 Apr; 73(8):2168-74. PubMed ID: 8156521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Mammography screening: A major issue in medicine.
    Autier P; Boniol M
    Eur J Cancer; 2018 Feb; 90():34-62. PubMed ID: 29272783
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Strategies of testing for syphilis during pregnancy.
    Shahrook S; Mori R; Ochirbat T; Gomi H
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2014 Oct; 2014(10):CD010385. PubMed ID: 25352226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.