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.
125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26866649)
1. The National Mammography Database: Preliminary Data. Lee CS; Bhargavan-Chatfield M; Burnside ES; Nagy P; Sickles EA AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Apr; 206(4):883-90. PubMed ID: 26866649 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Screening mammographic performance by race and age in the National Mammography Database: 29,479,665 screening mammograms from 13,181,241 women. Lee CS; Goldman L; Grimm LJ; Liu IX; Simanowith M; Rosenberg R; Zuley M; Moy L Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2024 Feb; 203(3):599-612. PubMed ID: 37897646 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Harmonizing Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations: Metrics and Accountability. Lee CS; Moy L; Friedewald SM; Sickles EA; Monticciolo DL AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Feb; 210(2):241-245. PubMed ID: 29045178 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Risk-Based Screening Mammography for Women Aged <40: Outcomes From the National Mammography Database. Lee CS; Ashih H; Sengupta D; Sickles EA; Zuley M; Pisano E J Am Coll Radiol; 2020 Mar; 17(3):368-376. PubMed ID: 31541655 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Linkage of the ACR National Mammography Database to the Network of State Cancer Registries: Proof of Concept Evaluation by the ACR National Mammography Database Committee. Zuley ML; Nishikawa RM; Lee CS; Burnside E; Rosenberg R; Sickles EA; Berg W; Leung J; Harvey J; Sengupta D; Gur D J Am Coll Radiol; 2019 Jan; 16(1):8-14. PubMed ID: 30100161 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A national breast cancer database. Smith R; Osuch JR; Linver MN Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1247-57. PubMed ID: 7480668 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. ACR BI-RADS Assessment Category 4 Subdivisions in Diagnostic Mammography: Utilization and Outcomes in the National Mammography Database. Elezaby M; Li G; Bhargavan-Chatfield M; Burnside ES; DeMartini WB Radiology; 2018 May; 287(2):416-422. PubMed ID: 29315061 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography. Yankaskas BC; Cleveland RJ; Schell MJ; Kozar R AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2001 Sep; 177(3):543-9. PubMed ID: 11517044 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Are radiologists' goals for mammography accuracy consistent with published recommendations? Jackson SL; Cook AJ; Miglioretti DL; Carney PA; Geller BM; Onega T; Rosenberg RD; Brenner RJ; Elmore JG Acad Radiol; 2012 Mar; 19(3):289-95. PubMed ID: 22130089 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Assessing the Recall Rate for Screening Mammography: Comparing the Medicare Hospital Compare Dataset With the National Mammography Database. Lee CS; Parise C; Burleson J; Seidenwurm D AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Jul; 211(1):127-132. PubMed ID: 29792737 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical outcome assessment in mammography: an audit of 7,506 screening and diagnostic mammography examinations. Tunçbilek I; Ozdemir A; Gültekin S; Oğur T; Erman R; Yüce C Diagn Interv Radiol; 2007 Dec; 13(4):183-7. PubMed ID: 18092288 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. New mammography screening performance metrics based on the entire screening episode. Sprague BL; Miglioretti DL; Lee CI; Perry H; Tosteson AAN; Kerlikowske K Cancer; 2020 Jul; 126(14):3289-3296. PubMed ID: 32374471 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography in a community practice: are there differences between specialists and general radiologists? Leung JW; Margolin FR; Dee KE; Jacobs RP; Denny SR; Schrumpf JD AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Jan; 188(1):236-41. PubMed ID: 17179372 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. Friedewald SM; Rafferty EA; Rose SL; Durand MA; Plecha DM; Greenberg JS; Hayes MK; Copit DS; Carlson KL; Cink TM; Barke LD; Greer LN; Miller DP; Conant EF JAMA; 2014 Jun; 311(24):2499-507. PubMed ID: 25058084 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]