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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23988397)

  • 1. Bias in breast cancer research in the screening era.
    Cox B; Sneyd MJ
    Breast; 2013 Dec; 22(6):1041-5. PubMed ID: 23988397
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Population estimates of survival in women with screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancer taking account of lead time and length bias.
    Lawrence G; Wallis M; Allgood P; Nagtegaal ID; Warwick J; Cafferty FH; Houssami N; Kearins O; Tappenden N; O'Sullivan E; Duffy SW
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2009 Jul; 116(1):179-85. PubMed ID: 18622697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Minor influence of self-selection bias on the effectiveness of breast cancer screening in case-control studies in the Netherlands.
    Paap E; Verbeek A; Puliti D; Broeders M; Paci E
    J Med Screen; 2011; 18(3):142-6. PubMed ID: 22045823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cancer screening: the clash of science and intuition.
    Kramer BS; Croswell JM
    Annu Rev Med; 2009; 60():125-37. PubMed ID: 18803476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Value of mammographic screening: assessment of studies and opinion.
    Alcorn FS
    Radiographics; 1990 Nov; 10(6):1133-9. PubMed ID: 2259768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. New citizens' juries in breast screening review are biased.
    Thornton H
    BMJ; 2012 Nov; 345():e7552. PubMed ID: 23166073
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Population-based study of breast cancer screening in Côte d'Or (France): clinical implications and factors affecting screening round adequacy.
    Ouedraogo S; Dabakuyo TS; Gentil J; Poillot ML; Dancourt V; Arveux P
    Eur J Cancer Prev; 2011 Nov; 20(6):462-74. PubMed ID: 22025137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Correcting for lead time and length bias in estimating the effect of screen detection on cancer survival.
    Duffy SW; Nagtegaal ID; Wallis M; Cafferty FH; Houssami N; Warwick J; Allgood PC; Kearins O; Tappenden N; O'Sullivan E; Lawrence G
    Am J Epidemiol; 2008 Jul; 168(1):98-104. PubMed ID: 18504245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Breast cancer screening.
    Warner EA
    Prim Care; 1992 Sep; 19(3):575-88. PubMed ID: 1410064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Secondary prevention: screening for breast cancer.
    Chamberlain J
    Eff Health Care; 1985; 2(5):179-88. PubMed ID: 10271344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Overdiagnosis in breast cancer: design and methods of estimation in observational studies.
    Puliti D; Miccinesi G; Paci E
    Prev Med; 2011 Sep; 53(3):131-3. PubMed ID: 21658405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Estimates of overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer associated with screening mammography.
    Morrell S; Barratt A; Irwig L; Howard K; Biesheuvel C; Armstrong B
    Cancer Causes Control; 2010 Feb; 21(2):275-82. PubMed ID: 19894130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Continuous tumour growth models, lead time estimation and length bias in breast cancer screening studies.
    Abrahamsson L; Isheden G; Czene K; Humphreys K
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Feb; 29(2):374-395. PubMed ID: 30854935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [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]  

  • 15. Are prognostic factors more favorable for breast cancer detected by organized screening than by opportunistic screening or clinical diagnosis? A study in Loire-Atlantique (France).
    Vanier A; Leux C; Allioux C; Billon-Delacour S; Lombrail P; Molinié F
    Cancer Epidemiol; 2013 Oct; 37(5):683-7. PubMed ID: 23880147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review.
    Puliti D; Duffy SW; Miccinesi G; de Koning H; Lynge E; Zappa M; Paci E;
    J Med Screen; 2012; 19 Suppl 1():42-56. PubMed ID: 22972810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Guideline implementation for breast healthcare in low- and middle-income countries: early detection resource allocation.
    Yip CH; Smith RA; Anderson BO; Miller AB; Thomas DB; Ang ES; Caffarella RS; Corbex M; Kreps GL; McTiernan A;
    Cancer; 2008 Oct; 113(8 Suppl):2244-56. PubMed ID: 18837017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reducing the effects of lead-time bias, length bias and over-detection in evaluating screening mammography: a censored bivariate data approach.
    Mahnken JD; Chan W; Freeman DH; Freeman JL
    Stat Methods Med Res; 2008 Dec; 17(6):643-63. PubMed ID: 18445697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Breast cancer screening: the evolving evidence.
    Smith RA; Duffy SW; Tabár L
    Oncology (Williston Park); 2012 May; 26(5):471-5, 479-81, 485-6. PubMed ID: 22730603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Breast cancer screening: why, when, and how many?
    Gemignani ML
    Clin Obstet Gynecol; 2011 Mar; 54(1):125-32. PubMed ID: 21278511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.