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 *

133 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23664400)

  • 1. Establishing a gold standard for test sets: variation in interpretive agreement of expert mammographers.
    Onega T; Anderson ML; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Geller B; Bogart A; Smith RA; Sickles EA; Monsees B; Bassett L; Carney PA; Kerlikowske K; Yankaskas BC
    Acad Radiol; 2013 Jun; 20(6):731-9. PubMed ID: 23664400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Radiologist agreement for mammographic recall by case difficulty and finding type.
    Onega T; Smith M; Miglioretti DL; Carney PA; Geller BA; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Rosenberg RD; Smith RA; Sickles EA; Haneuse S; Anderson ML; Yankaskas B
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2012 Nov; 9(11):788-94. PubMed ID: 23122345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Radiologist Agreement for Mammographic Recall by Case Difficulty and Finding Type.
    Onega T; Smith M; Miglioretti DL; Carney PA; Geller BA; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Rosenberg RD; Smith RA; Sickles EA; Haneuse S; Anderson ML; Yankaskas B
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2016 Nov; 13(11S):e72-e79. PubMed ID: 27814827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Correlation Between Screening Mammography Interpretive Performance on a Test Set and Performance in Clinical Practice.
    Miglioretti DL; Ichikawa L; Smith RA; Buist DSM; Carney PA; Geller B; Monsees B; Onega T; Rosenberg R; Sickles EA; Yankaskas BC; Kerlikowske K
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Oct; 24(10):1256-1264. PubMed ID: 28551400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Educational interventions to improve screening mammography interpretation: a randomized controlled trial.
    Geller BM; Bogart A; Carney PA; Sickles EA; Smith R; Monsees B; Bassett LW; Buist DM; Kerlikowske K; Onega T; Yankaskas BC; Haneuse S; Hill D; Wallis MG; Miglioretti D
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Jun; 202(6):W586-96. PubMed ID: 24848854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Interpretive Performance and Inter-Observer Agreement on Digital Mammography Test Sets.
    Kim SH; Lee EH; Jun JK; Kim YM; Chang YW; Lee JH; Kim HW; Choi EJ;
    Korean J Radiol; 2019 Feb; 20(2):218-224. PubMed ID: 30672161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial.
    Rafferty EA; Park JM; Philpotts LE; Poplack SP; Sumkin JH; Halpern EF; Niklason LT
    Radiology; 2013 Jan; 266(1):104-13. PubMed ID: 23169790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Are radiologists' goals for mammography accuracy consistent with published recommendations?
    Jackson SL; Cook AJ; Miglioretti DL; Carney PA; Geller BM; Onega T; Rosenberg RD; Brenner RJ; Elmore JG
    Acad Radiol; 2012 Mar; 19(3):289-95. PubMed ID: 22130089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Association between time spent interpreting, level of confidence, and accuracy of screening mammography.
    Carney PA; Bogart TA; Geller BM; Haneuse S; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Smith R; Rosenberg R; Yankaskas BC; Onega T; Miglioretti DL
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Apr; 198(4):970-8. PubMed ID: 22451568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Influence of annual interpretive volume on screening mammography performance in the United States.
    Buist DS; Anderson ML; Haneuse SJ; Sickles EA; Smith RA; Carney PA; Taplin SH; Rosenberg RD; Geller BM; Onega TL; Monsees BS; Bassett LW; Yankaskas BC; Elmore JG; Kerlikowske K; Miglioretti DL
    Radiology; 2011 Apr; 259(1):72-84. PubMed ID: 21343539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Inter-reader Variability in the Use of BI-RADS Descriptors for Suspicious Findings on Diagnostic Mammography: A Multi-institution Study of 10 Academic Radiologists.
    Lee AY; Wisner DJ; Aminololama-Shakeri S; Arasu VA; Feig SA; Hargreaves J; Ojeda-Fournier H; Bassett LW; Wells CJ; De Guzman J; Flowers CI; Campbell JE; Elson SL; Retallack H; Joe BN
    Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):60-66. PubMed ID: 27793579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria for screening mammography.
    Carney PA; Sickles EA; Monsees BS; Bassett LW; Brenner RJ; Feig SA; Smith RA; Rosenberg RD; Bogart TA; Browning S; Barry JW; Kelly MM; Tran KA; Miglioretti DL
    Radiology; 2010 May; 255(2):354-61. PubMed ID: 20413750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Using a tailored web-based intervention to set goals to reduce unnecessary recall.
    Carney PA; Bowles EJ; Sickles EA; Geller BM; Feig SA; Jackson S; Brown D; Cook A; Yankaskas BC; Miglioretti DL; Elmore JG
    Acad Radiol; 2011 Apr; 18(4):495-503. PubMed ID: 21251856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Radiologists’ Performance at Reduced Recall Rates in Mammography: A Laboratory Study.
    Mohd Norsuddin N; Mello-Thoms C; Reed W; Lewis S
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2019 Feb; 20(2):537-543. PubMed ID: 30803217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Mammographic interpretive volume and diagnostic mammogram interpretation performance in community practice.
    Haneuse S; Buist DS; Miglioretti DL; Anderson ML; Carney PA; Onega T; Geller BM; Kerlikowske K; Rosenberg RD; Yankaskas BC; Elmore JG; Taplin SH; Smith RA; Sickles EA
    Radiology; 2012 Jan; 262(1):69-79. PubMed ID: 22106351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography.
    Miglioretti DL; Smith-Bindman R; Abraham L; Brenner RJ; Carney PA; Bowles EJ; Buist DS; Elmore JG
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Dec; 99(24):1854-63. PubMed ID: 18073379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Breast cancer detection rate: designing imaging trials to demonstrate improvements.
    Jiang Y; Miglioretti DL; Metz CE; Schmidt RA
    Radiology; 2007 May; 243(2):360-7. PubMed ID: 17456866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.