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 *

230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24832200)

  • 1. Budget impact analysis of switching to digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening program: a discrete event simulation model.
    Comas M; Arrospide A; Mar J; Sala M; Vilaprinyó E; Hernández C; Cots F; Martínez J; Castells X
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(5):e97459. PubMed ID: 24832200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The cost-effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis in a population breast cancer screening program.
    Wang J; Phi XA; Greuter MJW; Daszczuk AM; Feenstra TL; Pijnappel RM; Vermeulen KM; Buls N; Houssami N; Lu W; de Bock GH
    Eur Radiol; 2020 Oct; 30(10):5437-5445. PubMed ID: 32382844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography breast cancer screening.
    Tosteson AN; Stout NK; Fryback DG; Acharyya S; Herman BA; Hannah LG; Pisano ED;
    Ann Intern Med; 2008 Jan; 148(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 18166758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Breast MRI screening for average-risk women: A monte carlo simulation cost-benefit analysis.
    Mango VL; Goel A; Mema E; Kwak E; Ha R
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Jun; 49(7):e216-e221. PubMed ID: 30632645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography.
    Stout NK; Lee SJ; Schechter CB; Kerlikowske K; Alagoz O; Berry D; Buist DS; Cevik M; Chisholm G; de Koning HJ; Huang H; Hubbard RA; Miglioretti DL; Munsell MF; Trentham-Dietz A; van Ravesteyn NT; Tosteson AN; Mandelblatt JS
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2014 Jun; 106(6):dju092. PubMed ID: 24872543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Implementation of digital mammography in a population-based breast cancer screening program: effect of screening round on recall rate and cancer detection.
    Sala M; Comas M; Macià F; Martinez J; Casamitjana M; Castells X
    Radiology; 2009 Jul; 252(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 19420316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Value Analysis of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer Screening in a US Medicaid Population.
    Miller JD; Bonafede MM; Herschorn SD; Pohlman SK; Troeger KA; Fajardo LL
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2017 Apr; 14(4):467-474.e5. PubMed ID: 28139412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cost-effectiveness of annual versus biennial screening mammography for women with high mammographic breast density.
    Pataky R; Ismail Z; Coldman AJ; Elwood M; Gelmon K; Hedden L; Hislop G; Kan L; McCoy B; Olivotto IA; Peacock S
    J Med Screen; 2014 Dec; 21(4):180-8. PubMed ID: 25186116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Program-specific cost-effectiveness analysis: breast cancer screening policies for a safety-net program.
    Melnikow J; Tancredi DJ; Yang Z; Ritley D; Jiang Y; Slee C; Popova S; Rylett P; Knutson K; Smalley S
    Value Health; 2013; 16(6):932-41. PubMed ID: 24041343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Transition from film to digital mammography: impact for breast cancer screening through the national breast and cervical cancer early detection program.
    van Ravesteyn NT; van Lier L; Schechter CB; Ekwueme DU; Royalty J; Miller JW; Near AM; Cronin KA; Heijnsdijk EA; Mandelblatt JS; de Koning HJ
    Am J Prev Med; 2015 May; 48(5):535-42. PubMed ID: 25891052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Economic evaluation of the breast cancer screening programme in the Basque Country: retrospective cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis.
    Arrospide A; Rue M; van Ravesteyn NT; Comas M; Soto-Gordoa M; Sarriugarte G; Mar J
    BMC Cancer; 2016 Jun; 16():344. PubMed ID: 27251556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Higher mammography screening costs without appreciable clinical benefit: the case of digital mammography.
    Kerlikowske K; Hubbard R; Tosteson AN
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2014 Aug; 106(8):. PubMed ID: 25031310
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dutch digital breast cancer screening: implications for breast cancer care.
    Timmers JM; den Heeten GJ; Adang EM; Otten JD; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ
    Eur J Public Health; 2012 Dec; 22(6):925-9. PubMed ID: 22158996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparative effectiveness of combined digital mammography and tomosynthesis screening for women with dense breasts.
    Lee CI; Cevik M; Alagoz O; Sprague BL; Tosteson AN; Miglioretti DL; Kerlikowske K; Stout NK; Jarvik JG; Ramsey SD; Lehman CD
    Radiology; 2015 Mar; 274(3):772-80. PubMed ID: 25350548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Evaluating the usefulness of a breast screening program in Bogotá, Colombia].
    González-Mariño MA
    Rev Salud Publica (Bogota); 2012; 14(1):41-52. PubMed ID: 23250314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography screening before the age of 50 in The Netherlands.
    Sankatsing VD; Heijnsdijk EA; van Luijt PA; van Ravesteyn NT; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
    Int J Cancer; 2015 Oct; 137(8):1990-9. PubMed ID: 25895135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--Oslo I study.
    Skaane P; Young K; Skjennald A
    Radiology; 2003 Dec; 229(3):877-84. PubMed ID: 14576447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Performance Goals for an Adjunct Diagnostic Test to Reduce Unnecessary Biopsies After Screening Mammography: Analysis of Costs, Benefits, and Consequences.
    Lee CI; Bensink ME; Berry K; Musa Z; Bodnar C; Dann R; Jarvik JG; Lehman CD; Ramsey SD
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2016 Nov; 13(11S):R81-R88. PubMed ID: 27814820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.