333 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28073150)
1. The impact of overdiagnosis on the selection of efficient lung cancer screening strategies.
Han SS; Ten Haaf K; Hazelton WD; Munshi VN; Jeon J; Erdogan SA; Johanson C; McMahon PM; Meza R; Kong CY; Feuer EJ; de Koning HJ; Plevritis SK
Int J Cancer; 2017 Jun; 140(11):2436-2443. PubMed ID: 28073150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of the Benefits and Harms of Lung Cancer Screening With Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Modeling Study for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
Meza R; Jeon J; Toumazis I; Ten Haaf K; Cao P; Bastani M; Han SS; Blom EF; Jonas DE; Feuer EJ; Plevritis SK; de Koning HJ; Kong CY
JAMA; 2021 Mar; 325(10):988-997. PubMed ID: 33687469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Lung Cancer Screening in the United States: A Comparative Modeling Study.
Criss SD; Cao P; Bastani M; Ten Haaf K; Chen Y; Sheehan DF; Blom EF; Toumazis I; Jeon J; de Koning HJ; Plevritis SK; Meza R; Kong CY
Ann Intern Med; 2019 Dec; 171(11):796-804. PubMed ID: 31683314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluating the impact of varied compliance to lung cancer screening recommendations using a microsimulation model.
Han SS; Erdogan SA; Toumazis I; Leung A; Plevritis SK
Cancer Causes Control; 2017 Sep; 28(9):947-958. PubMed ID: 28702814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Benefits and harms of computed tomography lung cancer screening strategies: a comparative modeling study for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
de Koning HJ; Meza R; Plevritis SK; ten Haaf K; Munshi VN; Jeon J; Erdogan SA; Kong CY; Han SS; van Rosmalen J; Choi SE; Pinsky PF; Berrington de Gonzalez A; Berg CD; Black WC; Tammemägi MC; Hazelton WD; Feuer EJ; McMahon PM
Ann Intern Med; 2014 Mar; 160(5):311-20. PubMed ID: 24379002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Screening for Lung Cancer With Low-Dose Computed Tomography: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
Jonas DE; Reuland DS; Reddy SM; Nagle M; Clark SD; Weber RP; Enyioha C; Malo TL; Brenner AT; Armstrong C; Coker-Schwimmer M; Middleton JC; Voisin C; Harris RP
JAMA; 2021 Mar; 325(10):971-987. PubMed ID: 33687468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A Comparative Modeling Analysis of Risk-Based Lung Cancer Screening Strategies.
Ten Haaf K; Bastani M; Cao P; Jeon J; Toumazis I; Han SS; Plevritis SK; Blom EF; Kong CY; Tammemägi MC; Feuer EJ; Meza R; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2020 May; 112(5):466-479. PubMed ID: 31566216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Trade-off between benefits, harms and economic efficiency of low-dose CT lung cancer screening: a microsimulation analysis of nodule management strategies in a population-based setting.
Treskova M; Aumann I; Golpon H; Vogel-Claussen J; Welte T; Kuhlmann A
BMC Med; 2017 Aug; 15(1):162. PubMed ID: 28838313
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Impact of Joint Lung Cancer Screening and Cessation Interventions Under the New Recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Meza R; Cao P; Jeon J; Taylor KL; Mandelblatt JS; Feuer EJ; Lowy DR
J Thorac Oncol; 2022 Jan; 17(1):160-166. PubMed ID: 34648947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Lung cancer screening overdiagnosis: reports of overdiagnosis in screening for lung cancer are grossly exaggerated.
Mortani Barbosa EJ
Acad Radiol; 2015 Aug; 22(8):976-82. PubMed ID: 25772581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Performance and Cost-Effectiveness of Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening Scenarios in a Population-Based Setting: A Microsimulation Modeling Analysis in Ontario, Canada.
Ten Haaf K; Tammemägi MC; Bondy SJ; van der Aalst CM; Gu S; McGregor SE; Nicholas G; de Koning HJ; Paszat LF
PLoS Med; 2017 Feb; 14(2):e1002225. PubMed ID: 28170394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Population impact of lung cancer screening in the United States: Projections from a microsimulation model.
Criss SD; Sheehan DF; Palazzo L; Kong CY
PLoS Med; 2018 Feb; 15(2):e1002506. PubMed ID: 29415013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Life-Gained-Based Versus Risk-Based Selection of Smokers for Lung Cancer Screening.
Cheung LC; Berg CD; Castle PE; Katki HA; Chaturvedi AK
Ann Intern Med; 2019 Nov; 171(9):623-632. PubMed ID: 31634914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cancer-Specific Mortality, All-Cause Mortality, and Overdiagnosis in Lung Cancer Screening Trials: A Meta-Analysis.
Ebell MH; Bentivegna M; Hulme C
Ann Fam Med; 2020 Nov; 18(6):545-552. PubMed ID: 33168683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Risk Model-Based Lung Cancer Screening : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
Toumazis I; Cao P; de Nijs K; Bastani M; Munshi V; Hemmati M; Ten Haaf K; Jeon J; Tammemägi M; Gazelle GS; Feuer EJ; Kong CY; Meza R; de Koning HJ; Plevritis SK; Han SS
Ann Intern Med; 2023 Mar; 176(3):320-332. PubMed ID: 36745885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Identifying Patients for Whom Lung Cancer Screening Is Preference-Sensitive: A Microsimulation Study.
Caverly TJ; Cao P; Hayward RA; Meza R
Ann Intern Med; 2018 Jul; 169(1):1-9. PubMed ID: 29809244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Trends in lung cancer risk and screening eligibility affect overdiagnosis estimates.
Blom EF; Ten Haaf K; de Koning HJ
Lung Cancer; 2020 Jan; 139():200-206. PubMed ID: 31816564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Performance of the cancer risk management model lung cancer screening module.
Flanagan WM; Evans WK; Fitzgerald NR; Goffin JR; Miller AB; Wolfson MC
Health Rep; 2015 May; 26(5):11-8. PubMed ID: 25993046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
