151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22695737)
1. External validation of Medicare claims codes for digital mammography and computer-aided detection.
Fenton JJ; Zhu W; Balch S; Smith-Bindman R; Lindfors KK; Hubbard RA
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2012 Aug; 21(8):1344-7. PubMed ID: 22695737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Internal validation of procedure codes on Medicare claims for digital mammograms and computer-aided detection.
Fenton JJ; Green P; Baldwin LM
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2009 Aug; 18(8):2186-9. PubMed ID: 19661075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms.
Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Stapleton S; Young K; Castellino RA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):377-84. PubMed ID: 17242245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Distinguishing screening from diagnostic mammograms using Medicare claims data.
Fenton JJ; Zhu W; Balch S; Smith-Bindman R; Fishman P; Hubbard RA
Med Care; 2014 Jul; 52(7):e44-51. PubMed ID: 22922433
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection.
Lehman CD; Wellman RD; Buist DS; Kerlikowske K; Tosteson AN; Miglioretti DL;
JAMA Intern Med; 2015 Nov; 175(11):1828-37. PubMed ID: 26414882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Using Medicare data to estimate the prevalence of breast cancer screening in older women: comparison of different methods to identify screening mammograms.
Randolph WM; Mahnken JD; Goodwin JS; Freeman JL
Health Serv Res; 2002 Dec; 37(6):1643-57. PubMed ID: 12546290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Can Medicare billing claims data be used to assess mammography utilization among women ages 65 and older?
Smith-Bindman R; Quale C; Chu PW; Rosenberg R; Kerlikowske K
Med Care; 2006 May; 44(5):463-70. PubMed ID: 16641665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Validation of a Medicare Claims-based Algorithm for Identifying Breast Cancers Detected at Screening Mammography.
Fenton JJ; Onega T; Zhu W; Balch S; Smith-Bindman R; Henderson L; Sprague BL; Kerlikowske K; Hubbard RA
Med Care; 2016 Mar; 54(3):e15-22. PubMed ID: 23929404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Short-term outcomes of screening mammography using computer-aided detection: a population-based study of medicare enrollees.
Fenton JJ; Xing G; Elmore JG; Bang H; Chen SL; Lindfors KK; Baldwin LM
Ann Intern Med; 2013 Apr; 158(8):580-7. PubMed ID: 23588746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effectiveness of computer-aided detection in community mammography practice.
Fenton JJ; Abraham L; Taplin SH; Geller BM; Carney PA; D'Orsi C; Elmore JG; Barlow WE;
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2011 Aug; 103(15):1152-61. PubMed ID: 21795668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience.
Destounis SV; DiNitto P; Logan-Young W; Bonaccio E; Zuley ML; Willison KM
Radiology; 2004 Aug; 232(2):578-84. PubMed ID: 15229350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Screening mammography-detected cancers: sensitivity of a computer-aided detection system applied to full-field digital mammograms.
Yang SK; Moon WK; Cho N; Park JS; Cha JH; Kim SM; Kim SJ; Im JG
Radiology; 2007 Jul; 244(1):104-11. PubMed ID: 17507722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Mammography screening using independent double reading with consensus: is there a potential benefit for computer-aided detection?
Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Hofvind S; Jahr G; Castellino RA
Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):241-8. PubMed ID: 22287148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: sensitivity and reproducibility in serial examinations.
Kim SJ; Moon WK; Cho N; Cha JH; Kim SM; Im JG
Radiology; 2008 Jan; 246(1):71-80. PubMed ID: 18096530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessing health care use and cost consequences of a new screening modality: the case of digital mammography.
Henderson LM; Hubbard RA; Onega TL; Zhu W; Buist DS; Fishman P; Tosteson AN
Med Care; 2012 Dec; 50(12):1045-52. PubMed ID: 22922432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Utilization of Computer-Aided Detection for Digital Screening Mammography in the United States, 2008 to 2016.
Keen JD; Keen JM; Keen JE
J Am Coll Radiol; 2018 Jan; 15(1 Pt A):44-48. PubMed ID: 28993109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis: Deep convolutional neural network with transfer learning from mammography.
Samala RK; Chan HP; Hadjiiski L; Helvie MA; Wei J; Cha K
Med Phys; 2016 Dec; 43(12):6654. PubMed ID: 27908154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Impact on breast cancer diagnosis in a multidisciplinary unit after the incorporation of mammography digitalization and computer-aided detection systems.
Romero C; Varela C; Muñoz E; Almenar A; Pinto JM; Botella M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Dec; 197(6):1492-7. PubMed ID: 22109307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Computer-aided detection in digital mammography: false-positive marks and their reproducibility in negative mammograms.
Kim SJ; Moon WK; Seong MH; Cho N; Chang JM
Acta Radiol; 2009 Nov; 50(9):999-1004. PubMed ID: 19863409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Identification of abnormal screening mammogram interpretation using Medicare claims data.
Hubbard RA; Zhu W; Balch S; Onega T; Fenton JJ
Health Serv Res; 2015 Feb; 50(1):290-304. PubMed ID: 24976519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
