188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25794100)
1. Criteria for identifying radiologists with acceptable screening mammography interpretive performance on basis of multiple performance measures.
Miglioretti DL; Ichikawa L; Smith RA; Bassett LW; Feig SA; Monsees B; Parikh JR; Rosenberg RD; Sickles EA; Carney PA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Apr; 204(4):W486-91. PubMed ID: 25794100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Radiologist Characteristics Associated with Interpretive Performance of Screening Mammography: A National Mammography Database (NMD) Study.
Lee CS; Moy L; Hughes D; Golden D; Bhargavan-Chatfield M; Hemingway J; Geras A; Duszak R; Rosenkrantz AB
Radiology; 2021 Sep; 300(3):518-528. PubMed ID: 34156300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria for screening mammography.
Carney PA; Sickles EA; Monsees BS; Bassett LW; Brenner RJ; Feig SA; Smith RA; Rosenberg RD; Bogart TA; Browning S; Barry JW; Kelly MM; Tran KA; Miglioretti DL
Radiology; 2010 May; 255(2):354-61. PubMed ID: 20413750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Screening Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
Lehman CD; Arao RF; Sprague BL; Lee JM; Buist DS; Kerlikowske K; Henderson LM; Onega T; Tosteson AN; Rauscher GH; Miglioretti DL
Radiology; 2017 Apr; 283(1):49-58. PubMed ID: 27918707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Diagnostic mammography: identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria.
Carney PA; Parikh J; Sickles EA; Feig SA; Monsees B; Bassett LW; Smith RA; Rosenberg R; Ichikawa L; Wallace J; Tran K; Miglioretti DL
Radiology; 2013 May; 267(2):359-67. PubMed ID: 23297329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.
Henderson LM; Benefield T; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Durham DD; Yankaskas BC; Bowling JM
Acad Radiol; 2015 Mar; 22(3):278-89. PubMed ID: 25435185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Diagnostic Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
Sprague BL; Arao RF; Miglioretti DL; Henderson LM; Buist DS; Onega T; Rauscher GH; Lee JM; Tosteson AN; Kerlikowske K; Lehman CD;
Radiology; 2017 Apr; 283(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 28244803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. National Performance Benchmarks for Screening Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
Lee CI; Abraham L; Miglioretti DL; Onega T; Kerlikowske K; Lee JM; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Rauscher GH; Bowles EJA; diFlorio-Alexander RM; Henderson LM;
Radiology; 2023 May; 307(4):e222499. PubMed ID: 37039687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography.
Taplin S; Abraham L; Barlow WE; Fenton JJ; Berns EA; Carney PA; Cutter GR; Sickles EA; Carl D; Elmore JG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Jun; 100(12):876-87. PubMed ID: 18544742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Performance of digital screening mammography among older women in the United States.
Henderson LM; O'Meara ES; Braithwaite D; Onega T;
Cancer; 2015 May; 121(9):1379-86. PubMed ID: 25537958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators.
Otten JD; Karssemeijer N; Hendriks JH; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; Verbeek AL; de Koning HJ; Holland R
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 May; 97(10):748-54. PubMed ID: 15900044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of radiologists' diagnostic work-up volume on interpretive performance.
Buist DS; Anderson ML; Smith RA; Carney PA; Miglioretti DL; Monsees BS; Sickles EA; Taplin SH; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Onega TL
Radiology; 2014 Nov; 273(2):351-64. PubMed ID: 24960110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interpretive Performance and Inter-Observer Agreement on Digital Mammography Test Sets.
Kim SH; Lee EH; Jun JK; Kim YM; Chang YW; Lee JH; Kim HW; Choi EJ;
Korean J Radiol; 2019 Feb; 20(2):218-224. PubMed ID: 30672161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists' characteristics associated with accuracy.
Elmore JG; Jackson SL; Abraham L; Miglioretti DL; Carney PA; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Kerlikowske K; Onega T; Rosenberg RD; Sickles EA; Buist DS
Radiology; 2009 Dec; 253(3):641-51. PubMed ID: 19864507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities.
Jackson SL; Taplin SH; Sickles EA; Abraham L; Barlow WE; Carney PA; Geller B; Berns EA; Cutter GR; Elmore JG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Jun; 101(11):814-27. PubMed ID: 19470953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.
Kemp Jacobsen K; O'Meara ES; Key D; S M Buist D; Kerlikowske K; Vejborg I; Sprague BL; Lynge E; von Euler-Chelpin M
Int J Cancer; 2015 Nov; 137(9):2198-207. PubMed ID: 25944711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evidence-based target recall rates for screening mammography.
Schell MJ; Yankaskas BC; Ballard-Barbash R; Qaqish BF; Barlow WE; Rosenberg RD; Smith-Bindman R
Radiology; 2007 Jun; 243(3):681-9. PubMed ID: 17517927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Correlation Between Screening Mammography Interpretive Performance on a Test Set and Performance in Clinical Practice.
Miglioretti DL; Ichikawa L; Smith RA; Buist DSM; Carney PA; Geller B; Monsees B; Onega T; Rosenberg R; Sickles EA; Yankaskas BC; Kerlikowske K
Acad Radiol; 2017 Oct; 24(10):1256-1264. PubMed ID: 28551400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
