224 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25522246)
1. Patient navigation to improve follow-up of abnormal mammograms among disadvantaged women.
Percac-Lima S; Ashburner JM; McCarthy AM; Piawah S; Atlas SJ
J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2015 Feb; 24(2):138-43. PubMed ID: 25522246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The longitudinal impact of patient navigation on equity in colorectal cancer screening in a large primary care network.
Percac-Lima S; López L; Ashburner JM; Green AR; Atlas SJ
Cancer; 2014 Jul; 120(13):2025-31. PubMed ID: 24691564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Linked claims and medical records for cancer case management : evaluation of mammography abnormalities.
Eberl MM; Watroba N; Reinhardt M; Pomerantz J; Serghany J; Broffman G; Fox CH; Mahoney MC; Edge SB
Cancer; 2007 Aug; 110(3):518-24. PubMed ID: 17577210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The use of the Gail model, body mass index and SNPs to predict breast cancer among women with abnormal (BI-RADS 4) mammograms.
McCarthy AM; Keller B; Kontos D; Boghossian L; McGuire E; Bristol M; Chen J; Domchek S; Armstrong K
Breast Cancer Res; 2015 Jan; 17(1):1. PubMed ID: 25567532
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Navigating Latinas with breast screen abnormalities to diagnosis: the Six Cities Study.
Ramirez AG; Pérez-Stable EJ; Penedo FJ; Talavera GA; Carrillo JE; Fernandez ME; Holden AE; Munoz E; San Miguel S; Gallion K
Cancer; 2013 Apr; 119(7):1298-305. PubMed ID: 23233265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Feasibility of patient navigation in resident primary care practice: a screening mammography quality improvement initiative.
Shroff S; McCoy ME; Sherman BJ; Bak SM; Mandyam V; Battaglia TA
J Ambul Care Manage; 2014; 37(4):293-302. PubMed ID: 25180645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Follow-up and timeliness after an abnormal cancer screening among underserved, urban women in a patient navigation program.
Markossian TW; Darnell JS; Calhoun EA
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2012 Oct; 21(10):1691-700. PubMed ID: 23045544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Women with abnormal screening mammography lost to follow-up: An experience from Taiwan.
Kuo CS; Chen GR; Hung SH; Liu YL; Huang KC; Cheng SY
Medicine (Baltimore); 2016 Jun; 95(24):e3889. PubMed ID: 27310983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comprehensive diagnostic program for medically underserved women with abnormal breast screening evaluations in an urban population.
Palmieri FM; DePeri ER; Mincey BA; Smith JA; Wen LK; Chewar DM; Abaya R; Colon-Otero G; Perez EA
Mayo Clin Proc; 2009 Apr; 84(4):317-22. PubMed ID: 19339648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Analysis of the results of mammography screening in Dubrovnik-Neretva County in the 2006-2009 period].
Dzono-Boban A; Mratović MC; Masanović M
Acta Med Croatica; 2010 Dec; 64(5):453-9. PubMed ID: 21692270
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Surveillance of probably benign (BI-RADS 3) lesions in mammography: what is the right follow-up protocol?
Buch KA; Qureshi MM; Carpentier B; Cunningham DA; Stone M; Jaffe C; Quinn M; Gonzalez C; LaVoye J; Hines N; Bloch BN
Breast J; 2015; 21(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 25669425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of referring physician specialty and practice type on referral for image-guided breast biopsy.
Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Gareen IF
J Am Coll Radiol; 2005 Jun; 2(6):488-93. PubMed ID: 17411865
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS guidelines by community radiologists: concordance of assessments and recommendations assigned to screening mammograms.
Lehman C; Holt S; Peacock S; White E; Urban N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Jul; 179(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 12076896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A Community-Based Partnership to Successfully Implement and Maintain a Breast Health Navigation Program.
Drake BF; Tannan S; Anwuri VV; Jackson S; Sanford M; Tappenden J; Goodman MS; Colditz GA
J Community Health; 2015 Dec; 40(6):1216-23. PubMed ID: 26077018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Time to diagnostic resolution after an uncertain screening mammogram in an underserved population.
Kumar AJ; Banco D; Steinberger EE; Chen J; Weidner R; Makim S; Parsons SK
Cancer Med; 2020 May; 9(9):3252-3258. PubMed ID: 32160406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Coding mammograms using the classification "probably benign finding--short interval follow-up suggested".
Caplan LS; Blackman D; Nadel M; Monticciolo DL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Feb; 172(2):339-42. PubMed ID: 9930778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A Comparison of Different Intensities of Patient Navigation After Abnormal Mammography.
Glassgow AE; Molina Y; Kim S; Campbell RT; Darnell J; Calhoun EA
Health Promot Pract; 2019 Nov; 20(6):914-921. PubMed ID: 29907079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Outcomes of unconventional utilization of BI-RADS category 3 assessment at opportunistic screening.
Altas H; Tureli D; Cengic I; Kucukkaya F; Aribal E; Kaya H
Acta Radiol; 2016 Nov; 57(11):1304-1309. PubMed ID: 26019241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Disparities in abnormal mammogram follow-up time for Asian women compared with non-Hispanic white women and between Asian ethnic groups.
Nguyen KH; Pasick RJ; Stewart SL; Kerlikowske K; Karliner LS
Cancer; 2017 Sep; 123(18):3468-3475. PubMed ID: 28603859
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Patient Navigation Improves Subsequent Breast Cancer Screening After a Noncancerous Result: Evidence from the Patient Navigation in Medically Underserved Areas Study.
Molina Y; Kim SJ; Berrios N; Glassgow AE; San Miguel Y; Darnell JS; Pauls H; Vijayasiri G; Warnecke RB; Calhoun EA
J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2018 Mar; 27(3):317-323. PubMed ID: 28933653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
