425 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26676234)
1. Clinical outcomes of modelling mammography screening strategies.
Yaffe MJ; Mittmann N; Lee P; Tosteson AN; Trentham-Dietz A; Alagoz O; Stout NK
Health Rep; 2015 Dec; 26(12):9-15. PubMed ID: 26676234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Modelling mammography screening for breast cancer in the Canadian context: Modification and testing of a microsimulation model.
Yaffe MJ; Mittmann N; Lee P; Tosteson AN; Trentham-Dietz A; Alagoz O; Stout NK
Health Rep; 2015 Dec; 26(12):3-8. PubMed ID: 26676233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Collaborative Modeling to Compare Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Decision Analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
Trentham-Dietz A; Chapman CH; Jayasekera J; Lowry KP; Heckman-Stoddard BM; Hampton JM; Caswell-Jin JL; Gangnon RE; Lu Y; Huang H; Stein S; Sun L; Gil Quessep EJ; Yang Y; Lu Y; Song J; Muñoz DF; Li Y; Kurian AW; Kerlikowske K; O'Meara ES; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Feuer EJ; Berry D; Plevritis SK; Huang X; de Koning HJ; van Ravesteyn NT; Lee SJ; Alagoz O; Schechter CB; Stout NK; Miglioretti DL; Mandelblatt JS
JAMA; 2024 Jun; 331(22):1947-1960. PubMed ID: 38687505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mammography screening: a new estimate of number needed to screen to prevent one breast cancer death.
Hendrick RE; Helvie MA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Mar; 198(3):723-8. PubMed ID: 22358016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Collaborative Modeling of the Benefits and Harms Associated With Different U.S. Breast Cancer Screening Strategies.
Mandelblatt JS; Stout NK; Schechter CB; van den Broek JJ; Miglioretti DL; Krapcho M; Trentham-Dietz A; Munoz D; Lee SJ; Berry DA; van Ravesteyn NT; Alagoz O; Kerlikowske K; Tosteson AN; Near AM; Hoeffken A; Chang Y; Heijnsdijk EA; Chisholm G; Huang X; Huang H; Ergun MA; Gangnon R; Sprague BL; Plevritis S; Feuer E; de Koning HJ; Cronin KA
Ann Intern Med; 2016 Feb; 164(4):215-25. PubMed ID: 26756606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of recommendations for screening mammography using CISNET models.
Arleo EK; Hendrick RE; Helvie MA; Sickles EA
Cancer; 2017 Oct; 123(19):3673-3680. PubMed ID: 28832983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Implications of CISNET modeling on number needed to screen and mortality reduction with digital mammography in women 40-49 years old.
Hendrick RE; Helvie MA; Hardesty LA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Dec; 203(6):1379-81. PubMed ID: 25415718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. The effect of mammography screening regimen on incidence-based breast cancer mortality.
Yaffe MJ; Mittmann N; Alagoz O; Trentham-Dietz A; Tosteson AN; Stout NK
J Med Screen; 2018 Dec; 25(4):197-204. PubMed ID: 30049249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast cancer screening policies in developing countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis for India.
Okonkwo QL; Draisma G; der Kinderen A; Brown ML; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Sep; 100(18):1290-300. PubMed ID: 18780864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Total cost-effectiveness of mammography screening strategies.
Mittmann N; Stout NK; Lee P; Tosteson AN; Trentham-Dietz A; Alagoz O; Yaffe MJ
Health Rep; 2015 Dec; 26(12):16-25. PubMed ID: 26676235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost-effectiveness of screening women with familial risk for breast cancer with magnetic resonance imaging.
Saadatmand S; Tilanus-Linthorst MM; Rutgers EJ; Hoogerbrugge N; Oosterwijk JC; Tollenaar RA; Hooning M; Loo CE; Obdeijn IM; Heijnsdijk EA; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2013 Sep; 105(17):1314-21. PubMed ID: 23940285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The risk of radiation-induced breast cancers due to biennial mammographic screening in women aged 50-69 years is minimal.
Hauge IH; Pedersen K; Olerud HM; Hole EO; Hofvind S
Acta Radiol; 2014 Dec; 55(10):1174-9. PubMed ID: 24311702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Breast Tumor Prognostic Characteristics and Biennial vs Annual Mammography, Age, and Menopausal Status.
Miglioretti DL; Zhu W; Kerlikowske K; Sprague BL; Onega T; Buist DS; Henderson LM; Smith RA;
JAMA Oncol; 2015 Nov; 1(8):1069-77. PubMed ID: 26501844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Benefits and harms of mammography screening after age 74 years: model estimates of overdiagnosis.
van Ravesteyn NT; Stout NK; Schechter CB; Heijnsdijk EA; Alagoz O; Trentham-Dietz A; Mandelblatt JS; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2015 Jul; 107(7):. PubMed ID: 25948872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. United States Preventive Services Task Force screening mammography recommendations: science ignored.
Hendrick RE; Helvie MA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Feb; 196(2):W112-6. PubMed ID: 21257850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Tailored Breast Screening Trial (TBST)].
Paci E; Mantellini P; Giorgi Rossi P; Falini P; Puliti D;
Epidemiol Prev; 2013; 37(4-5):317-27. PubMed ID: 24293498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A model-based comparison of breast cancer screening strategies: mammograms and clinical breast examinations.
Shen Y; Parmigiani G
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2005 Feb; 14(2):529-32. PubMed ID: 15734983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
