357 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25847639)
1. National expenditure for false-positive mammograms and breast cancer overdiagnoses estimated at $4 billion a year.
Ong MS; Mandl KD
Health Aff (Millwood); 2015 Apr; 34(4):576-83. PubMed ID: 25847639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. False-Positive Mammograms, Breast Cancer Overdiagnoses.
Monsees B; Rebner M
Health Aff (Millwood); 2015 Jul; 34(7):1253. PubMed ID: 26153322
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations.
Elmore JG; Barton MB; Moceri VM; Polk S; Arena PJ; Fletcher SW
N Engl J Med; 1998 Apr; 338(16):1089-96. PubMed ID: 9545356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cost of breast-related care in the year following false positive screening mammograms.
Chubak J; Boudreau DM; Fishman PA; Elmore JG
Med Care; 2010 Sep; 48(9):815-20. PubMed ID: 20706161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Tailoring Breast Cancer Screening Intervals by Breast Density and Risk for Women Aged 50 Years or Older: Collaborative Modeling of Screening Outcomes.
Trentham-Dietz A; Kerlikowske K; Stout NK; Miglioretti DL; Schechter CB; Ergun MA; van den Broek JJ; Alagoz O; Sprague BL; van Ravesteyn NT; Near AM; Gangnon RE; Hampton JM; Chandler Y; de Koning HJ; Mandelblatt JS; Tosteson AN;
Ann Intern Med; 2016 Nov; 165(10):700-712. PubMed ID: 27548583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The patient burden of screening mammography recall.
Alcusky M; Philpotts L; Bonafede M; Clarke J; Skoufalos A
J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2014 Sep; 23 Suppl 1():S11-9. PubMed ID: 25247382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cost-effectiveness of mammography screening for breast cancer in a low socioeconomic group of Iranian women.
Barfar E; Rashidian A; Hosseini H; Nosratnejad S; Barooti E; Zendehdel K
Arch Iran Med; 2014 Apr; 17(4):241-5. PubMed ID: 24724599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts.
Sprague BL; Stout NK; Schechter C; van Ravesteyn NT; Cevik M; Alagoz O; Lee CI; van den Broek JJ; Miglioretti DL; Mandelblatt JS; de Koning HJ; Kerlikowske K; Lehman CD; Tosteson AN
Ann Intern Med; 2015 Feb; 162(3):157-66. PubMed ID: 25486550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment associated with breast cancer mammography screening: A simulation study with calibration to population-based data.
Seigneurin A; Labarère J; François O; Exbrayat C; Dupouy M; Filippi M; Colonna M
Breast; 2016 Aug; 28():60-6. PubMed ID: 27240167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Neglected aspects of false positive findings of mammography in breast cancer screening: analysis of false positive cases from the Stockholm trial.
Lidbrink E; Elfving J; Frisell J; Jonsson E
BMJ; 1996 Feb; 312(7026):273-6. PubMed ID: 8611781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Why question screening mammography for women in their forties?
Fletcher SW
Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1259-71. PubMed ID: 7480669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of age and breast density on screening mammograms with false-positive findings.
Lehman CD; White E; Peacock S; Drucker MJ; Urban N
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Dec; 173(6):1651-5. PubMed ID: 10584815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Breast cancer screening for women with Down syndrome: lessons learned.
Chicoine B; Roth M; Chicoine L; Sulo S
Intellect Dev Disabil; 2015 Apr; 53(2):91-9. PubMed ID: 25860447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Implications of Overdiagnosis: Impact on Screening Mammography Practices.
Morris E; Feig SA; Drexler M; Lehman C
Popul Health Manag; 2015 Sep; 18 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S3-11. PubMed ID: 26414384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Insights Into Breast Cancer Screening: A Computer Simulation of Two Contemporary Screening Strategies.
Carter KJ; Castro F; Morcos RN
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Mar; 210(3):564-571. PubMed ID: 29323554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.
Smith-Bindman R; Chu PW; Miglioretti DL; Sickles EA; Blanks R; Ballard-Barbash R; Bobo JK; Lee NC; Wallis MG; Patnick J; Kerlikowske K
JAMA; 2003 Oct; 290(16):2129-37. PubMed ID: 14570948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Personalizing Breast Cancer Screening Based on Polygenic Risk and Family History.
van den Broek JJ; Schechter CB; van Ravesteyn NT; Janssens ACJW; Wolfson MC; Trentham-Dietz A; Simard J; Easton DF; Mandelblatt JS; Kraft P; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2021 Apr; 113(4):434-442. PubMed ID: 32853342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Double versus single reading of mammograms in a breast cancer screening programme: a cost-consequence analysis.
Posso MC; Puig T; Quintana MJ; Solà-Roca J; Bonfill X
Eur Radiol; 2016 Sep; 26(9):3262-71. PubMed ID: 26747264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The National Cancer Screening Program for breast cancer in the Republic of Korea: is it cost-effective?
Kang MH; Park EC; Choi KS; Suh M; Jun JK; Cho E
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2013; 14(3):2059-65. PubMed ID: 23679319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
