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 *

182 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29433892)

  • 1. Communication Practices of Mammography Facilities and Timely Follow-up of a Screening Mammogram with a BI-RADS 0 Assessment.
    Schapira MM; Barlow WE; Conant EF; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Haas JS; Onega T; Beaber EF; Goodrich M; McCarthy AM; Herschorn SD; Skinner CS; Harrington TO; Geller B
    Acad Radiol; 2018 Sep; 25(9):1118-1127. PubMed ID: 29433892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessing the Effects of Participant Preference and Demographics in the Usage of Web-based Survey Questionnaires by Women Attending Screening Mammography in British Columbia.
    Mlikotic R; Parker B; Rajapakshe R
    J Med Internet Res; 2016 Mar; 18(3):e70. PubMed ID: 27005707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Impact of Telephone Communication on Patient Adherence With Follow-Up Recommendations After an Abnormal Screening Mammogram.
    Nguyen DL; Oluyemi E; Myers KS; Harvey SC; Mullen LA; Ambinder EB
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2020 Sep; 17(9):1139-1148. PubMed ID: 32353352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Multilevel Predictors of Continued Adherence to Breast Cancer Screening Among Women Ages 50-74 Years in a Screening Population.
    Beaber EF; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Haas JS; Onega T; Schapira MM; McCarthy AM; Li CI; Herschorn SD; Lehman CD; Wernli KJ; Barlow WE
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2019 Aug; 28(8):1051-1059. PubMed ID: 30481098
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Mammography facilities serving vulnerable women have longer follow-up times.
    Karliner LS; Kaplan C; Livaudais-Toman J; Kerlikowske K
    Health Serv Res; 2019 Feb; 54 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):226-233. PubMed ID: 30394526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Linked claims and medical records for cancer case management : evaluation of mammography abnormalities.
    Eberl MM; Watroba N; Reinhardt M; Pomerantz J; Serghany J; Broffman G; Fox CH; Mahoney MC; Edge SB
    Cancer; 2007 Aug; 110(3):518-24. PubMed ID: 17577210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Women with abnormal screening mammography lost to follow-up: An experience from Taiwan.
    Kuo CS; Chen GR; Hung SH; Liu YL; Huang KC; Cheng SY
    Medicine (Baltimore); 2016 Jun; 95(24):e3889. PubMed ID: 27310983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Follow-Up of Abnormal Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening by Race/Ethnicity.
    McCarthy AM; Kim JJ; Beaber EF; Zheng Y; Burnett-Hartman A; Chubak J; Ghai NR; McLerran D; Breen N; Conant EF; Geller BM; Green BB; Klabunde CN; Inrig S; Skinner CS; Quinn VP; Haas JS; Schnall M; Rutter CM; Barlow WE; Corley DA; Armstrong K; Doubeni CA;
    Am J Prev Med; 2016 Oct; 51(4):507-12. PubMed ID: 27132628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Facility Mammography Volume in Relation to Breast Cancer Screening Outcomes.
    Onega T; Goldman LE; Walker RL; Miglioretti DL; Buist DS; Taplin S; Geller BM; Hill DA; Smith-Bindman R
    J Med Screen; 2016 Mar; 23(1):31-7. PubMed ID: 26265482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessment of a Risk-Based Approach for Triaging Mammography Examinations During Periods of Reduced Capacity.
    Miglioretti DL; Bissell MCS; Kerlikowske K; Buist DSM; Cummings SR; Henderson LM; Onega T; O'Meara ES; Rauscher GH; Sprague BL; Tosteson ANA; Wernli KJ; Lee JM; Lee CI
    JAMA Netw Open; 2021 Mar; 4(3):e211974. PubMed ID: 33764423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Patient navigation to improve follow-up of abnormal mammograms among disadvantaged women.
    Percac-Lima S; Ashburner JM; McCarthy AM; Piawah S; Atlas SJ
    J Womens Health (Larchmt); 2015 Feb; 24(2):138-43. PubMed ID: 25522246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reassessment and Follow-Up Results of BI-RADS Category 3 Lesions Detected on Screening Breast Ultrasound.
    Chae EY; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Choi WJ; Kim HH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Mar; 206(3):666-72. PubMed ID: 26901026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Outcomes of unconventional utilization of BI-RADS category 3 assessment at opportunistic screening.
    Altas H; Tureli D; Cengic I; Kucukkaya F; Aribal E; Kaya H
    Acta Radiol; 2016 Nov; 57(11):1304-1309. PubMed ID: 26019241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Variation in Screening Abnormality Rates and Follow-Up of Breast, Cervical and Colorectal Cancer Screening within the PROSPR Consortium.
    Tosteson AN; Beaber EF; Tiro J; Kim J; McCarthy AM; Quinn VP; Doria-Rose VP; Wheeler CM; Barlow WE; Bronson M; Garcia M; Corley DA; Haas JS; Halm EA; Kamineni A; Rutter CM; Tosteson TD; Trentham-Dietz A; Weaver DL;
    J Gen Intern Med; 2016 Apr; 31(4):372-9. PubMed ID: 26658934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Tailored Breast Screening Trial (TBST)].
    Paci E; Mantellini P; Giorgi Rossi P; Falini P; Puliti D;
    Epidemiol Prev; 2013; 37(4-5):317-27. PubMed ID: 24293498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Surveillance of probably benign (BI-RADS 3) lesions in mammography: what is the right follow-up protocol?
    Buch KA; Qureshi MM; Carpentier B; Cunningham DA; Stone M; Jaffe C; Quinn M; Gonzalez C; LaVoye J; Hines N; Bloch BN
    Breast J; 2015; 21(2):168-74. PubMed ID: 25669425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Communicating Mammography Results: By What Method and How Quickly Do Women Want Their Screening Mammogram Results?
    Shah BA; Staschen J; Pham N; Johns A
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2019 Jul; 16(7):928-935. PubMed ID: 30773374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Rate and Timeliness of Diagnostic Evaluation and Biopsy After Recall From Screening Mammography in the National Mammography Database.
    Oluyemi ET; Grimm LJ; Goldman L; Burleson J; Simanowith M; Yao K; Rosenberg RD
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2024 Mar; 21(3):427-438. PubMed ID: 37722468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A Simulation Screening Mammography Module Created for Instruction and Assessment: Radiology Residents vs National Benchmarks.
    Poot JD; Chetlen AL
    Acad Radiol; 2016 Nov; 23(11):1454-1462. PubMed ID: 27637285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The Effect of California's Breast Density Notification Legislation on Breast Cancer Screening.
    Chau SL; Alabaster A; Luikart K; Brenman LM; Habel LA
    J Prim Care Community Health; 2017 Apr; 8(2):55-62. PubMed ID: 27799412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.