190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24052045)
1. Re-attendance after false-positive screening mammography: a population-based study in the Netherlands.
Setz-Pels W; Duijm LE; Coebergh JW; Rutten M; Nederend J; Voogd AC
Br J Cancer; 2013 Oct; 109(8):2044-50. PubMed ID: 24052045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Predictors of re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a false positive referral: A study among women in the south of the Netherlands.
Voogd AC; Molnar Z; Nederend J; Schipper RJ; Strobbe LJA; Duijm LEM
Breast; 2024 Apr; 74():103702. PubMed ID: 38447293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of false-positives and women's characteristics on long-term adherence to breast cancer screening.
Román R; Sala M; De La Vega M; Natal C; Galceran J; González-Román I; Baroja A; Zubizarreta R; Ascunce N; Salas D; Castells X
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 Nov; 130(2):543-52. PubMed ID: 21617920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Participation behaviour following a false positive test in the Copenhagen mammography screening programme.
Andersen SB; Vejborg I; von Euler-Chelpin M
Acta Oncol; 2008; 47(4):550-5. PubMed ID: 18465321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. False-positive results in the randomized controlled trial of mammographic screening from age 40 ("Age" trial).
Johns LE; Moss SM;
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2010 Nov; 19(11):2758-64. PubMed ID: 20837718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than non-blinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands.
Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; de Haan AF; Wauters CA; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
Eur J Cancer; 2015 Feb; 51(3):391-9. PubMed ID: 25573788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Implications of false-positive results for future cancer screenings.
Taksler GB; Keating NL; Rothberg MB
Cancer; 2018 Jun; 124(11):2390-2398. PubMed ID: 29682740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a repeated false positive recall.
Klompenhouwer EG; Duijm LE; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; Louwman MW; Coebergh JW; Venderink D; Broeders MJ
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2014 Jun; 145(2):429-37. PubMed ID: 24748569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance.
Brett J; Austoker J
J Public Health Med; 2001 Dec; 23(4):292-300. PubMed ID: 11873891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Likelihood of early detection of breast cancer in relation to false-positive risk in life-time mammographic screening: population-based cohort study.
Otten JDM; Fracheboud J; den Heeten GJ; Otto SJ; Holland R; de Koning HJ; Broeders MJM; Verbeek ALM
Ann Oncol; 2013 Oct; 24(10):2501-2506. PubMed ID: 23788759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mammography screening for breast cancer in Copenhagen April 1991-March 1997. Mammography Screening Evaluation Group.
Lynge E
APMIS Suppl; 1998; 83():1-44. PubMed ID: 9850674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Monitoring women's experiences during three rounds of breast cancer screening: results from a longitudinal study.
Drossaert CH; Boer H; Seydel ER
J Med Screen; 2002; 9(4):168-75. PubMed ID: 12518007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Long term breast cancer screening in Nijmegen, The Netherlands: the nine rounds from 1975-92.
Otten JD; van Dijck JA; Peer PG; Straatman H; Verbeek AL; Mravunac M; Hendriks JH; Holland R
J Epidemiol Community Health; 1996 Jun; 50(3):353-8. PubMed ID: 8935470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact of false-positive mammography on subsequent screening attendance and risk of cancer.
McCann J; Stockton D; Godward S
Breast Cancer Res; 2002; 4(5):R11. PubMed ID: 12223128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Attending the breast screening programme after breast cancer treatment: a population-based study.
de Munck L; Kwast A; Reiding D; de Bock GH; Otter R; Willemse PH; Siesling S
Cancer Epidemiol; 2013 Dec; 37(6):968-72. PubMed ID: 24075800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Systematic review of the psychological consequences of false-positive screening mammograms.
Bond M; Pavey T; Welch K; Cooper C; Garside R; Dean S; Hyde C
Health Technol Assess; 2013 Mar; 17(13):1-170, v-vi. PubMed ID: 23540978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases.
Seigneurin A; Exbrayat C; Labarère J; Delafosse P; Poncet F; Colonna M
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 May; 127(1):221-8. PubMed ID: 20809364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Predicting reattendance to the second round of the Maltese national breast screening programme: an analytical descriptive study.
Marmarà D; Marmarà V; Hubbard G
BMC Public Health; 2019 Feb; 19(1):189. PubMed ID: 30760275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The influence of a false-positive mammogram on a woman's subsequent behaviour for detecting breast cancer.
Lampic C; Thurfjell E; Sjödén PO
Eur J Cancer; 2003 Aug; 39(12):1730-7. PubMed ID: 12888368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Factors associated with false-positive mammography at first screen in an Asian population.
Ho PJ; Bok CM; Ishak HMM; Lim LY; Liu J; Wong FY; Chia KS; Tan MH; Chay WY; Hartman M; Li J
PLoS One; 2019; 14(3):e0213615. PubMed ID: 30856210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
