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 *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29266244)

  • 21. Reply to "Finding the Best Recall and Cancer Detection Rates for Screening Mammography".
    Grabler P; Ansell DA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Aug; 209(2):W111. PubMed ID: 28731805
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Cost-effectiveness analysis of mammography screening in Hong Kong Chinese using state-transition Markov modelling.
    Wong IO; Kuntz KM; Cowling BJ; Lam CL; Leung GM
    Hong Kong Med J; 2010 Jun; 16 Suppl 3():38-41. PubMed ID: 20601733
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Age to Begin and Intervals for Breast Cancer Screening: Balancing Benefits and Harms.
    Destounis S; Santacroce A
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Feb; 210(2):279-284. PubMed ID: 29064754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Authors' reply to: "Questionable method for estimating the influence of mammography screening on breast cancer mortality in the Netherlands".
    Sankatsing VDV; van Ravesteyn NT; Heijnsdijk EAM; de Koning HJ
    Int J Cancer; 2017 Oct; 141(8):1709-1710. PubMed ID: 28681483
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Ultrasound as an Adjunct to Mammography for Breast Cancer Screening: A Health Technology Assessment.
    Health Quality Ontario
    Ont Health Technol Assess Ser; 2016; 16(15):1-71. PubMed ID: 27468326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A model-based comparison of breast cancer screening strategies: mammograms and clinical breast examinations.
    Shen Y; Parmigiani G
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 2005 Feb; 14(2):529-32. PubMed ID: 15734983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Cost-effectiveness analysis for breast cancer screening: double reading versus single + CAD reading.
    Sato M; Kawai M; Nishino Y; Shibuya D; Ohuchi N; Ishibashi T
    Breast Cancer; 2014 Sep; 21(5):532-41. PubMed ID: 23104393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Is mammography for breast cancer screening cost-effective in both Western and asian countries?: results of a systematic review.
    Yoo KB; Kwon JA; Cho E; Kang MH; Nam JM; Choi KS; Kim EK; Choi YJ; Park EC
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2013; 14(7):4141-9. PubMed ID: 23991967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening modalities for breast cancer in Japan with special reference to women aged 40-49 years.
    Ohnuki K; Kuriyama S; Shoji N; Nishino Y; Tsuji I; Ohuchi N
    Cancer Sci; 2006 Nov; 97(11):1242-7. PubMed ID: 16918992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Cost-effectiveness of mammography, MRI, and ultrasonography for breast cancer screening.
    Feig S
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2010 Sep; 48(5):879-91. PubMed ID: 20868891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Cost-effectiveness of the Norwegian breast cancer screening program.
    van Luijt PA; Heijnsdijk EA; de Koning HJ
    Int J Cancer; 2017 Feb; 140(4):833-840. PubMed ID: 27861849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening With Risk-Based and Universal Mammography Screening Compared With Clinical Breast Examination: A Propensity Score Analysis of 1 429 890 Taiwanese Women.
    Yen AM; Tsau HS; Fann JC; Chen SL; Chiu SY; Lee YC; Pan SL; Chiu HM; Kuo WH; Chang KJ; Wu YY; Chuang SL; Hsu CY; Chang DC; Koong SL; Wu CY; Chia SL; Chen MJ; Chen HH; Chiou ST
    JAMA Oncol; 2016 Jul; 2(7):915-21. PubMed ID: 27030951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. To screen or not to screen women in their 40s for breast cancer: is personalized risk-based screening the answer?
    Mandelblatt JS; Stout N; Trentham-Dietz A
    Ann Intern Med; 2011 Jul; 155(1):58-60. PubMed ID: 21727294
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Screening Mammography in Women 40-49 Years Old: Current Evidence.
    Ray KM; Joe BN; Freimanis RI; Sickles EA; Hendrick RE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Feb; 210(2):264-270. PubMed ID: 29064760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Clinical outcomes of modelling mammography screening strategies.
    Yaffe MJ; Mittmann N; Lee P; Tosteson AN; Trentham-Dietz A; Alagoz O; Stout NK
    Health Rep; 2015 Dec; 26(12):9-15. PubMed ID: 26676234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Assessing the Cost-Effectiveness of Updated Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines for Average-Risk Women.
    Tina Shih YC; Dong W; Xu Y; Shen Y
    Value Health; 2019 Feb; 22(2):185-193. PubMed ID: 30711063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comments on "Finding the optimal mammography screening strategy: A cost-effectiveness analysis of 920 modeled strategies".
    Braillon A
    Int J Cancer; 2022 Aug; 151(4):649-650. PubMed ID: 35460074
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts.
    Sprague BL; Stout NK; Schechter C; van Ravesteyn NT; Cevik M; Alagoz O; Lee CI; van den Broek JJ; Miglioretti DL; Mandelblatt JS; de Koning HJ; Kerlikowske K; Lehman CD; Tosteson AN
    Ann Intern Med; 2015 Feb; 162(3):157-66. PubMed ID: 25486550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Program-specific cost-effectiveness analysis: breast cancer screening policies for a safety-net program.
    Melnikow J; Tancredi DJ; Yang Z; Ritley D; Jiang Y; Slee C; Popova S; Rylett P; Knutson K; Smalley S
    Value Health; 2013; 16(6):932-41. PubMed ID: 24041343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Beyond the
    Destounis S
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2022 Sep; 219(3):525. PubMed ID: 35576520
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.