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.
736 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24746887)
21. Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice. Greenberg JS; Javitt MC; Katzen J; Michael S; Holland AE AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Sep; 203(3):687-93. PubMed ID: 24918774 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. 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]
23. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters. Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Aug; 99(15):1162-70. PubMed ID: 17652282 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Breast Cancer Screening Using Tomosynthesis or Mammography: A Meta-analysis of Cancer Detection and Recall. Marinovich ML; Hunter KE; Macaskill P; Houssami N J Natl Cancer Inst; 2018 Sep; 110(9):942-949. PubMed ID: 30107542 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Digital Mammography versus Digital Mammography Plus Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening: The Reggio Emilia Tomosynthesis Randomized Trial. Pattacini P; Nitrosi A; Giorgi Rossi P; Iotti V; Ginocchi V; Ravaioli S; Vacondio R; Braglia L; Cavuto S; Campari C; Radiology; 2018 Aug; 288(2):375-385. PubMed ID: 29869961 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Evidence on Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography Versus Digital Mammography When Using Tomosynthesis (Three-dimensional Mammography) for Population Breast Cancer Screening. Houssami N Clin Breast Cancer; 2018 Aug; 18(4):255-260.e1. PubMed ID: 29066138 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis versus digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening programme (To-Be): a randomised, controlled trial. Hofvind S; Holen ÅS; Aase HS; Houssami N; Sebuødegård S; Moger TA; Haldorsen IS; Akslen LA Lancet Oncol; 2019 Jun; 20(6):795-805. PubMed ID: 31078459 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Early clinical experience with digital breast tomosynthesis for screening mammography. Durand MA; Haas BM; Yao X; Geisel JL; Raghu M; Hooley RJ; Horvath LJ; Philpotts LE Radiology; 2015 Jan; 274(1):85-92. PubMed ID: 25188431 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparison of breast cancers detected in the Verona screening program following transition to digital breast tomosynthesis screening with cancers detected at digital mammography screening. Caumo F; Romanucci G; Hunter K; Zorzi M; Brunelli S; Macaskill P; Houssami N Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Jul; 170(2):391-397. PubMed ID: 29557996 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Skaane P; Bandos AI; Gullien R; Eben EB; Ekseth U; Haakenaasen U; Izadi M; Jebsen IN; Jahr G; Krager M; Niklason LT; Hofvind S; Gur D Radiology; 2013 Apr; 267(1):47-56. PubMed ID: 23297332 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Follow-up and final results of the Oslo I Study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading. Skaane P; Skjennald A; Young K; Egge E; Jebsen I; Sager EM; Scheel B; Søvik E; Ertzaas AK; Hofvind S; Abdelnoor M Acta Radiol; 2005 Nov; 46(7):679-89. PubMed ID: 16372686 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Artificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the Mammography Screening with Artificial Intelligence trial (MASAI): a clinical safety analysis of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, single-blinded, screening accuracy study. Lång K; Josefsson V; Larsson AM; Larsson S; Högberg C; Sartor H; Hofvind S; Andersson I; Rosso A Lancet Oncol; 2023 Aug; 24(8):936-944. PubMed ID: 37541274 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Adjunct Screening With Tomosynthesis or Ultrasound in Women With Mammography-Negative Dense Breasts: Interim Report of a Prospective Comparative Trial. Tagliafico AS; Calabrese M; Mariscotti G; Durando M; Tosto S; Monetti F; Airaldi S; Bignotti B; Nori J; Bagni A; Signori A; Sormani MP; Houssami N J Clin Oncol; 2016 Jun; 34(16):1882-1888. PubMed ID: 26962097 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Nation-wide data on screening performance during the transition to digital mammography: observations in 6 million screens. van Luijt PA; Fracheboud J; Heijnsdijk EA; den Heeten GJ; de Koning HJ; Eur J Cancer; 2013 Nov; 49(16):3517-25. PubMed ID: 23871248 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. 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]
37. Application of breast tomosynthesis in screening: incremental effect on mammography acquisition and reading time. Bernardi D; Ciatto S; Pellegrini M; Anesi V; Burlon S; Cauli E; Depaoli M; Larentis L; Malesani V; Targa L; Baldo P; Houssami N Br J Radiol; 2012 Dec; 85(1020):e1174-8. PubMed ID: 23175484 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Increased Cancer Detection Rate and Variations in the Recall Rate Resulting from Implementation of 3D Digital Breast Tomosynthesis into a Population-based Screening Program. Sharpe RE; Venkataraman S; Phillips J; Dialani V; Fein-Zachary VJ; Prakash S; Slanetz PJ; Mehta TS Radiology; 2016 Mar; 278(3):698-706. PubMed ID: 26458206 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Accuracy and reading time for six strategies using digital breast tomosynthesis in women with mammographically negative dense breasts. Tagliafico AS; Calabrese M; Bignotti B; Signori A; Fisci E; Rossi F; Valdora F; Houssami N Eur Radiol; 2017 Dec; 27(12):5179-5184. PubMed ID: 28643094 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Performance of breast cancer screening using digital breast tomosynthesis: results from the prospective population-based Oslo Tomosynthesis Screening Trial. Skaane P; Sebuødegård S; Bandos AI; Gur D; Østerås BH; Gullien R; Hofvind S Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Jun; 169(3):489-496. PubMed ID: 29429017 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]