194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23471650)
1. Diagnostic imaging and biopsy pathways following abnormal screen-film and digital screening mammography.
Hubbard RA; Zhu W; Horblyuk R; Karliner L; Sprague BL; Henderson L; Lee D; Onega T; Buist DS; Sweet A
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2013 Apr; 138(3):879-87. PubMed ID: 23471650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cancer cases from ACRIN digital mammographic imaging screening trial: radiologist analysis with use of a logistic regression model.
Pisano ED; Acharyya S; Cole EB; Marques HS; Yaffe MJ; Blevins M; Conant EF; Hendrick RE; Baum JK; Fajardo LL; Jong RA; Koomen MA; Kuzmiak CM; Lee Y; Pavic D; Yoon SC; Padungchaichote W; Gatsonis C
Radiology; 2009 Aug; 252(2):348-57. PubMed ID: 19703878
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effects of digital mammography uptake on downstream breast-related care among older women.
Hubbard RA; Zhu W; Onega TL; Fishman P; Henderson LM; Tosteson AN; Buist DS
Med Care; 2012 Dec; 50(12):1053-9. PubMed ID: 23132199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer: an evidence-based analysis.
Medical Advisory Secretariat
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2007; 7(1):1-32. PubMed ID: 23074501
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Breast Cancer Characteristics Associated With Digital Versus Film-Screen Mammography for Screen-Detected and Interval Cancers.
Henderson LM; Miglioretti DL; Kerlikowske K; Wernli KJ; Sprague BL; Lehman CD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Sep; 205(3):676-84. PubMed ID: 26295657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities.
Jackson SL; Taplin SH; Sickles EA; Abraham L; Barlow WE; Carney PA; Geller B; Berns EA; Cutter GR; Elmore JG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Jun; 101(11):814-27. PubMed ID: 19470953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial: objectives and methodology.
Pisano ED; Gatsonis CA; Yaffe MJ; Hendrick RE; Tosteson AN; Fryback DG; Bassett LW; Baum JK; Conant EF; Jong RA; Rebner M; D'Orsi CJ
Radiology; 2005 Aug; 236(2):404-12. PubMed ID: 15961755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Facility Mammography Volume in Relation to Breast Cancer Screening Outcomes.
Onega T; Goldman LE; Walker RL; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Taplin S; Geller BM; Hill DA; Smith-Bindman R
J Med Screen; 2016 Mar; 23(1):31-7. PubMed ID: 26265482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Timeliness of abnormal screening and diagnostic mammography follow-up at facilities serving vulnerable women.
Goldman LE; Walker R; Hubbard R; Kerlikowske K;
Med Care; 2013 Apr; 51(4):307-14. PubMed ID: 23358386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reduction in false-positive results after introduction of digital mammography: analysis from four population-based breast cancer screening programs in Spain.
Sala M; Salas D; Belvis F; Sánchez M; Ferrer J; Ibañez J; Román R; Ferrer F; Vega A; Laso MS; Castells X
Radiology; 2011 Feb; 258(2):388-95. PubMed ID: 21273520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Comparison of direct digital mammography, computed radiography, and film-screen in the French national breast cancer screening program.
Séradour B; Heid P; Estève J
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Jan; 202(1):229-36. PubMed ID: 24370149
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study.
Kerlikowske K; Hubbard RA; Miglioretti DL; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Lehman CD; Taplin SH; Sickles EA;
Ann Intern Med; 2011 Oct; 155(8):493-502. PubMed ID: 22007043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [ROC analysis comparing screen film mammography and digital mammography].
Gaspard-Bakhach S; Dilhuydy MH; Bonichon F; Barreau B; Henriques C; Maugey-Laulom B
J Radiol; 2000 Feb; 81(2):133-9. PubMed ID: 10705143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Facility characteristics do not explain higher false-positive rates in diagnostic mammography at facilities serving vulnerable women.
Goldman LE; Walker R; Miglioretti DL; Smith-Bindman R; Kerlikowske AK;
Med Care; 2012 Mar; 50(3):210-6. PubMed ID: 22186768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of Resource Utilization and Clinical Outcomes Following Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Versus Digital Mammography: Findings From a Learning Health System.
Alsheik NH; Dabbous F; Pohlman SK; Troeger KM; Gliklich RE; Donadio GM; Su Z; Menon V; Conant EF
Acad Radiol; 2019 May; 26(5):597-605. PubMed ID: 30057195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography.
Taplin S; Abraham L; Barlow WE; Fenton JJ; Berns EA; Carney PA; Cutter GR; Sickles EA; Carl D; Elmore JG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Jun; 100(12):876-87. PubMed ID: 18544742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Rate and Timeliness of Diagnostic Evaluation and Biopsy After Recall From Screening Mammography in the National Mammography Database.
Oluyemi ET; Grimm LJ; Goldman L; Burleson J; Simanowith M; Yao K; Rosenberg RD
J Am Coll Radiol; 2024 Mar; 21(3):427-438. PubMed ID: 37722468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
