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)

  • 21. Is radiologists' volume of mammography reading related to accuracy? A critical review of the literature.
    Moss SM; Blanks RG; Bennett RL
    Clin Radiol; 2005 Jun; 60(6):623-6. PubMed ID: 16038688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Regulatory Compliance in Mammography.
    Loesch J
    Radiol Technol; 2016; 87(4):425M-442M; quiz 443M-444M. PubMed ID: 26952076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Peer review in cardiothoracic radiology.
    Kanne JP
    J Thorac Imaging; 2014 Sep; 29(5):270-6; quiz 277-8. PubMed ID: 25160595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Masters of radiology panel discussion: defining a quality dashboard for radiology--what are the right metrics?
    Forman HP; Larson DB; Kazerooni EA; Norbash A; Crowe JK; Javitt MC; Beauchamp NJ
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Apr; 200(4):839-44. PubMed ID: 23521458
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Meaningful Peer Review in Radiology: A Review of Current Practices and Potential Future Directions.
    Moriarity AK; Hawkins CM; Geis JR; Dreyer KJ; Kamer AP; Khandheria P; Morey J; Whitfill J; Wiggins RH; Itri JN
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2016 Dec; 13(12 Pt A):1519-1524. PubMed ID: 28233533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. American Board of Radiology Perspective on Maintenance of Certification: Part IV--Practice Quality Improvement for Diagnostic Radiology.
    Strife JL; Kun LE; Becker GJ; Dunnick NR; Bosma J; Hattery RR
    Radiographics; 2007; 27(3):769-74. PubMed ID: 17495291
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Translating an ACGME-required Practice Quality Improvement project into preparation for the Maintenance of Certification Part IV.
    Day K
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2014 Oct; 11(10):1009-10. PubMed ID: 24929919
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Audit: time to review the cycle.
    Glew S; Sornalingam S; Crossman T
    Br J Gen Pract; 2014 Dec; 64(629):606-7. PubMed ID: 25452509
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The development and implementation of standards of care in a breast cancer screening program.
    Nielsen B; Miaskowski C; McCoy C; Rudisch M
    Oncol Nurs Forum; 1991; 18(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 2003118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Performance-based assessment of radiology practitioners: promoting improvement in accordance with the 2007 joint commission standards.
    Donnelly LF
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2007 Oct; 4(10):699-703. PubMed ID: 17903754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Compliance With Screening Mammography Guidelines After a False-Positive Mammogram.
    Hardesty LA; Lind KE; Gutierrez EJ
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2016 Sep; 13(9):1032-8. PubMed ID: 27233908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The American Board of Radiology perspective on maintenance of certification: part IV--practice quality improvement in diagnostic radiology.
    Strife JL; Kun LE; Becker GJ; Dunnick NR; Bosma J; Hattery RR
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2007 May; 4(5):300-4. PubMed ID: 17467612
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Are current mammography quality standards act (MQSA) physician guidelines truly adequate?
    Melton AR
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Aug; 191(2):W79. PubMed ID: 18647894
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A comparison of interpretation of screening mammograms by a radiographer, a doctor and a radiologist: results and implications.
    Haiart DC; Henderson J
    Br J Clin Pract; 1991; 45(1):43-5. PubMed ID: 1931542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Ultrasound quarterly: editor's introduction.
    Dubinsky TJ
    Ultrasound Q; 2014 Jun; 30(2):89-90. PubMed ID: 24850023
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Perceptual type error in everyday practice.
    Owens EJ; Taylor NR; Howlett DC
    Clin Radiol; 2016 Jun; 71(6):593-601. PubMed ID: 26973044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Can radiographers read screening mammograms?
    Torreggiani WC; Hamilton S
    Clin Radiol; 2003 Jun; 58(6):497; author reply 497. PubMed ID: 12788328
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. New rules for mobile diagnostic test providers.
    Chananie SJ
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2009 Aug; 6(8):588-9. PubMed ID: 19643388
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Using a NPWE model observer to assess suitable image quality for a digital mammography quality assurance programme.
    Monnin P; Bochud FO; Verdun FR
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010; 139(1-3):459-62. PubMed ID: 20395413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Quality control in mammography. Everyone has a role. American College of Radiology.
    Haus A
    Adm Radiol; 1992 Nov; 11(11):123, 125-6, 129-30. PubMed ID: 10123210
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.