156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29337068)
1. The impact of compression force and pressure at prevalent screening on subsequent re-attendance in a national screening program.
Moshina N; Sebuødegård S; Holen ÅS; Waade GG; Tsuruda K; Hofvind S
Prev Med; 2018 Mar; 108():129-136. PubMed ID: 29337068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program: re-attendance related to the women's experiences, intentions and previous screening result.
Hofvind SS; Wang H; Thoresen S
Cancer Causes Control; 2003 May; 14(4):391-8. PubMed ID: 12846372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Breast compression and reported pain during mammographic screening.
Moshina N; Sagstad S; Sebuødegård S; Waade GG; Gran E; Music J; Hofvind S
Radiography (Lond); 2020 May; 26(2):133-139. PubMed ID: 32052779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mammographic compression--a need for mechanical standardization.
Branderhorst W; de Groot JE; Highnam R; Chan A; Böhm-Vélez M; Broeders MJ; den Heeten GJ; Grimbergen CA
Eur J Radiol; 2015 Apr; 84(4):596-602. PubMed ID: 25596915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Breast compression across consecutive examinations among females participating in BreastScreen Norway.
Waade GG; Sebuødegård S; Hogg P; Hofvind S
Br J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 91(1090):20180209. PubMed ID: 29927636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Experience of pain during mammographic screening by three different compression paddles.
Moshina N; Sagstad S; Holen ÅS; Backmann HA; Westermann LC; Hofvind S
Radiography (Lond); 2023 Aug; 29(5):903-910. PubMed ID: 37453253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Digital breast tomosynthesis in a population based mammographic screening program: Breast compression and early performance measures.
Moshina N; Larsen M; Holen ÅS; Waade GG; Aase HS; Hofvind S
Eur J Radiol; 2021 Jun; 139():109665. PubMed ID: 33823373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Is breast compression associated with breast cancer detection and other early performance measures in a population-based breast cancer screening program?
Moshina N; Sebuødegård S; Hofvind S
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2017 Jun; 163(3):605-613. PubMed ID: 28357655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance.
Brett J; Austoker J
J Public Health Med; 2001 Dec; 23(4):292-300. PubMed ID: 11873891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast compression parameters and mammographic density in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Programme.
Moshina N; Roman M; Waade GG; Sebuødegård S; Ursin G; Hofvind S
Eur Radiol; 2018 Apr; 28(4):1662-1672. PubMed ID: 29098437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Screening at stationary versus mobile units in BreastScreen Norway.
Holen Å; Sebuødegård S; Waade GG; Aase H; Hopland NM; Pedersen K; Larsen M; Tsuruda KM; Hofvind S
J Med Screen; 2020 Mar; 27(1):31-39. PubMed ID: 31554445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Breast compression and experienced pain during mammography by use of three different compression paddles.
Moshina N; Sebuødegård S; Evensen KT; Hantho C; Iden KA; Hofvind S
Eur J Radiol; 2019 Jun; 115():59-65. PubMed ID: 31084760
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Compression force and radiation dose in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program.
Waade GG; Sanderud A; Hofvind S
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Mar; 88():41-46. PubMed ID: 28189207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Lower attendance rates in immigrant versus non-immigrant women in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Programme.
Bhargava S; Tsuruda K; Moen K; Bukholm I; Hofvind S
J Med Screen; 2018 Sep; 25(3):155-161. PubMed ID: 29059006
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Mammographic surveillance of asymptomatic breast cancer relatives in general practice: rate of re-attendance and GP- and patient-related barriers.
Duijm LE; Guit GL; Zaat JO
Fam Pract; 1997 Dec; 14(6):450-4. PubMed ID: 9476075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Compression forces used in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program.
Waade GG; Moshina N; Sebuødegård S; Hogg P; Hofvind S
Br J Radiol; 2017 Mar; 90(1071):20160770. PubMed ID: 28102696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Predictors of re-attendance at biennial screening mammography following a false positive referral: A study among women in the south of the Netherlands.
Voogd AC; Molnar Z; Nederend J; Schipper RJ; Strobbe LJA; Duijm LEM
Breast; 2024 Apr; 74():103702. PubMed ID: 38447293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A novel approach to mammographic breast compression: Improved standardization and reduced discomfort by controlling pressure instead of force.
de Groot JE; Broeders MJ; Branderhorst W; den Heeten GJ; Grimbergen CA
Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081901. PubMed ID: 23927315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Association of diagnostic work-up with subsequent attendance in a breast cancer screening program for false-positive cases.
Seigneurin A; Exbrayat C; Labarère J; Delafosse P; Poncet F; Colonna M
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2011 May; 127(1):221-8. PubMed ID: 20809364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Influence of breast compression pressure on the performance of population-based mammography screening.
Holland K; Sechopoulos I; Mann RM; den Heeten GJ; van Gils CH; Karssemeijer N
Breast Cancer Res; 2017 Nov; 19(1):126. PubMed ID: 29183348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
