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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

166 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27162043)

  • 1. RAD-AID Asha Jyoti Mammogram Quality Assessment in India: Optimizing Mobile Radiology.
    Mango VL; Ha R; Nguyen B; Mema E; Kobeski J; Singh T; Khandelwal N
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2016 Jul; 13(7):831-4. PubMed ID: 27162043
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. MQSA helps eliminate inferior mammography.
    Wagner SK
    Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1997 Nov; 19(11):129-32, 136. PubMed ID: 10176114
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Quality improvement projects for value-based care in breast imaging.
    Sippo DA; Nagy P
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2014 Dec; 11(12 Pt A):1189-90. PubMed ID: 25307675
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Radiology peer-review feedback scorecards: optimizing transparency, accessibility, and education in a children׳s hospital.
    Iyer RS; Munsell A; Weinberger E
    Curr Probl Diagn Radiol; 2014; 43(4):169-74. PubMed ID: 24948210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Canadian test screens mammogram readers.
    Wagner SK
    Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1994 Sep; 16(9):63-5. PubMed ID: 10150904
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Streamlining mobile mammography services. Concern over loss of quality.
    McCue P
    Appl Radiol; 1987 Dec; 16(12):27-8, 30-1. PubMed ID: 10285605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The challenge of assessing reader performance in mammography.
    Brennan PC; Soh BP
    Clin Radiol; 2012 Feb; 67(2):192. PubMed ID: 22118712
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An introduction to basic quality metrics for practicing radiologists.
    Kruskal JB; Sarwar A
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2015 Apr; 12(4):330-2. PubMed ID: 25745829
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessment of mammographic film processor performance in a hospital and mobile screening unit.
    Murray JG; Dowsett DJ; Laird O; Ennis JT
    Br J Radiol; 1992 Dec; 65(780):1097-101. PubMed ID: 1286417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. PinkDrive intervention 'over-rated' - experts.
    Bateman C
    S Afr Med J; 2013 Feb; 103(3):136-7. PubMed ID: 23472682
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Utility of medical data registries.
    Morin RL
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2014 Dec; 11(12 Pt A):1191. PubMed ID: 25444071
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Adding value as young radiologists: challenges and opportunities, part 1.
    Morey JM; Haney NM; Schoppe K; Hawkins CM
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2015 May; 12(5):533-6. PubMed ID: 25940366
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Radiologist training, not volume of readings, associated with accurate mammogram interpretations.
    Rollins G
    Rep Med Guidel Outcomes Res; 2003 Mar; 14(6):5-6. PubMed ID: 12838966
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quality assurance in mammography: status of residency education.
    Bassett LW; Lubisich JP; Bresch JP; Jessop NW; Hendrick RE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Feb; 160(2):271-4. PubMed ID: 8424332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Meet high expectations for mammography with high-quality services.
    Linver M
    Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1998 Nov; 20(11):89-92, 97-8. PubMed ID: 10344867
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of proscriptive health care policy implementation in screening mammography.
    Beam CA; Conant EF; Sickles EA; Weinstein SP
    Radiology; 2003 Nov; 229(2):534-40. PubMed ID: 14595152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Limitations of minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria for screening mammography.
    Doyle GP; Onysko J; Pogany L; Major D; Caines J; Shumak R; Wadden N; Carney PA; Sickles EA; Monsees BS; Bassett LW; Miglioretti DL
    Radiology; 2011 Mar; 258(3):960-1. PubMed ID: 21339358
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Improving mammographic interpretation: double reading and computer-aided diagnosis.
    Helvie M
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2007 Sep; 45(5):801-11, vi. PubMed ID: 17888770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The ACR's Mammography Accreditation Program: ten years of experience since MQSA.
    Destouet JM; Bassett LW; Yaffe MJ; Butler PF; Wilcox PA
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2005 Jul; 2(7):585-94. PubMed ID: 17411883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Measurements in radiology: the need for high reproducibility.
    Di Leo G
    Pediatr Radiol; 2015 Jan; 45(1):32-4. PubMed ID: 25552389
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.