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.
132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2738948)
1. Film-screen mammography: comparison of views. Bassett LW; Bunnell DH; Gold RH; Jahanshahi R J Natl Med Assoc; 1989 Apr; 81(4):391-4. PubMed ID: 2738948 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Computer-aided detection in digital mammography: comparison of craniocaudal, mediolateral oblique, and mediolateral views. Kim SJ; Moon WK; Cho N; Cha JH; Kim SM; Im JG Radiology; 2006 Dec; 241(3):695-701. PubMed ID: 17114620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Breast radiography using the oblique projection. Bassett LW; Gold RH Radiology; 1983 Nov; 149(2):585-7. PubMed ID: 6622708 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Observer variability in cancer detection during routine repeat (incident) mammographic screening in a study of two versus one view mammography. Blanks RG; Wallis MG; Given-Wilson RM J Med Screen; 1999; 6(3):152-8. PubMed ID: 10572847 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. Lewin JM; D'Orsi CJ; Hendrick RE; Moss LJ; Isaacs PK; Karellas A; Cutter GR AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Sep; 179(3):671-7. PubMed ID: 12185042 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Screening mammography: value in women 35-39 years old. Liberman L; Dershaw DD; Deutch BM; Thaler HT; Lippin BS AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Jul; 161(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 8517320 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Influence of number of views and mammographic film density on the detection of invasive cancers: results from the NHS Breast Screening Programme. Young KC; Wallis MG; Blanks RG; Moss SM Br J Radiol; 1997 May; 70(833):482-8. PubMed ID: 9227229 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mammography for screening high-risk patients for cancer: value of including a lateral projection. Kreager JA; Kornguth PJ AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Feb; 162(2):295-7. PubMed ID: 8310913 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Second-screening mammography: one versus two views per breast. Ikeda DM; Sickles EA Radiology; 1988 Sep; 168(3):651-6. PubMed ID: 3406393 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast cancer detection: one versus two views. Bassett LW; Bunnell DH; Jahanshahi R; Gold RH; Arndt RD; Linsman J Radiology; 1987 Oct; 165(1):95-7. PubMed ID: 3628795 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Latent image fading in screen-film mammography: lack of clinical relevance for batch-processed films. Sickles EA Radiology; 1995 Feb; 194(2):389-92. PubMed ID: 7824715 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Baseline screening mammography: one vs two views per breast. Sickles EA; Weber WN; Galvin HB; Ominsky SH; Sollitto RA AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1986 Dec; 147(6):1149-53. PubMed ID: 3490749 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. An investigation into why two-view mammography is better than one-view in breast cancer screening. Hackshaw AK; Wald NJ; Michell MJ; Field S; Wilson AR Clin Radiol; 2000 Jun; 55(6):454-8. PubMed ID: 10873691 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography. Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Survey of mammography practices. Bassett LW; Diamond JJ; Gold RH; McLelland R AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1987 Dec; 149(6):1149-52. PubMed ID: 3318338 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Breast imaging: a comparison of digital luminescence radiographs displayed on TV-monitor and film-screen mammography. Jarlman O; Borg A; Braw M; Kehler M; Lyttkens K; Samuelsson L Cancer Detect Prev; 1994; 18(5):375-81. PubMed ID: 7812984 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]