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 *

214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29730729)

  • 1. Incorporation of the technologist's opinion for arbitration of discrepant assessments among radiologists at screening mammography.
    Coolen AMP; Lameijer JRC; Voogd AC; Strobbe LJ; Louwman MWJ; Tjan-Heijnen VCG; Duijm LEM
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2018 Aug; 171(1):143-149. PubMed ID: 29730729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Characteristics of screen-detected cancers following concordant or discordant recalls at blinded double reading in biennial digital screening mammography.
    Coolen AMP; Lameijer JRC; Voogd AC; Louwman MWJ; Strobbe LJ; Tjan-Heijnen VCG; Duijm LEM
    Eur Radiol; 2019 Jan; 29(1):337-344. PubMed ID: 29943181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Arbitration of discrepant BI-RADS 0 recalls by a third reader at screening mammography lowers recall rate but not the cancer detection rate and sensitivity at blinded and non-blinded double reading.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Weber RJ; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; Broeders MJ; Tjan-Heijnen VC; Duijm LE
    Breast; 2015 Oct; 24(5):601-7. PubMed ID: 26117723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Aug; 99(15):1162-70. PubMed ID: 17652282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Discrepant screening mammography assessments at blinded and non-blinded double reading: impact of arbitration by a third reader on screening outcome.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; Tjan-Heijnen VC; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
    Eur Radiol; 2015 Oct; 25(10):2821-9. PubMed ID: 25894007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than non-blinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; de Haan AF; Wauters CA; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
    Eur J Cancer; 2015 Feb; 51(3):391-9. PubMed ID: 25573788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of integrating digital breast tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D-mammography on radiologists' true-positive and false-positive detection in a population screening trial: A descriptive study.
    Bernardi D; Li T; Pellegrini M; Macaskill P; Valentini M; Fantò C; Ostillio L; Houssami N
    Eur J Radiol; 2018 Sep; 106():26-31. PubMed ID: 30150047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Additional Breast Cancer Detection at Digital Screening Mammography through Quality Assurance Sessions between Technologists and Radiologists.
    Coolen AMP; Korte B; Tjan-Heijnen VCG; Bodewes HW; Voogd AC; Duijm LEM
    Radiology; 2020 Mar; 294(3):509-517. PubMed ID: 31909697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Medical radiologic technologist review: effects on a population-based breast cancer screening program.
    Tonita JM; Hillis JP; Lim CH
    Radiology; 1999 May; 211(2):529-33. PubMed ID: 10228538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.
    Henderson LM; Benefield T; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Durham DD; Yankaskas BC; Bowling JM
    Acad Radiol; 2015 Mar; 22(3):278-89. PubMed ID: 25435185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. On the role of arbitration of discordant double readings of screening mammography: experience from two Italian programmes.
    Caumo F; Brunelli S; Tosi E; Teggi S; Bovo C; Bonavina G; Ciatto S
    Radiol Med; 2011 Feb; 116(1):84-91. PubMed ID: 20981500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Double versus single reading of mammograms in a breast cancer screening programme: a cost-consequence analysis.
    Posso MC; Puig T; Quintana MJ; Solà-Roca J; Bonfill X
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Sep; 26(9):3262-71. PubMed ID: 26747264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Breast cancer screening with tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D mammography compared with 2D mammography alone (STORM-2): a population-based prospective study.
    Bernardi D; Macaskill P; Pellegrini M; Valentini M; Fantò C; Ostillio L; Tuttobene P; Luparia A; Houssami N
    Lancet Oncol; 2016 Aug; 17(8):1105-1113. PubMed ID: 27345635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study.
    Ciatto S; Houssami N; Bernardi D; Caumo F; Pellegrini M; Brunelli S; Tuttobene P; Bricolo P; Fantò C; Valentini M; Montemezzi S; Macaskill P
    Lancet Oncol; 2013 Jun; 14(7):583-9. PubMed ID: 23623721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Does computer-aided detection have a role in the arbitration of discordant double-reading opinions in a breast-screening programme?
    James JJ; Cornford EJ
    Clin Radiol; 2009 Jan; 64(1):46-51. PubMed ID: 19070697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Impact of the second reader on screening outcome at blinded double reading of digital screening mammograms.
    Coolen AMP; Voogd AC; Strobbe LJ; Louwman MWJ; Tjan-Heijnen VCG; Duijm LEM
    Br J Cancer; 2018 Aug; 119(4):503-507. PubMed ID: 30038325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Benefits of the quality assured double and arbitration reading of mammograms in the early diagnosis of breast cancer in symptomatic women.
    Waldmann A; Kapsimalakou S; Katalinic A; Grande-Nagel I; Stoeckelhuber BM; Fischer D; Barkhausen J; Vogt FM
    Eur Radiol; 2012 May; 22(5):1014-22. PubMed ID: 22095439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Invasive breast cancers detected by screening mammography: a detailed comparison of computer-aided detection-assisted single reading and double reading.
    Cawson JN; Nickson C; Amos A; Hill G; Whan AB; Kavanagh AM
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2009 Oct; 53(5):442-9. PubMed ID: 19788479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of radiologists' diagnostic work-up volume on interpretive performance.
    Buist DS; Anderson ML; Smith RA; Carney PA; Miglioretti DL; Monsees BS; Sickles EA; Taplin SH; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Onega TL
    Radiology; 2014 Nov; 273(2):351-64. PubMed ID: 24960110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Artificial intelligence (AI) for breast cancer screening: BreastScreen population-based cohort study of cancer detection.
    Marinovich ML; Wylie E; Lotter W; Lund H; Waddell A; Madeley C; Pereira G; Houssami N
    EBioMedicine; 2023 Apr; 90():104498. PubMed ID: 36863255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.