131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30343993)
21. The role of the digital rectal examination as diagnostic test for prostate cancer detection in obese patients.
Dell'Atti L
J BUON; 2015; 20(6):1601-5. PubMed ID: 26854458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Urine TMPRSS2:ERG Plus PCA3 for Individualized Prostate Cancer Risk Assessment.
Tomlins SA; Day JR; Lonigro RJ; Hovelson DH; Siddiqui J; Kunju LP; Dunn RL; Meyer S; Hodge P; Groskopf J; Wei JT; Chinnaiyan AM
Eur Urol; 2016 Jul; 70(1):45-53. PubMed ID: 25985884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. An evaluation of usefulness of prostate specific antigen and digital rectal examination in the diagnosis of prostate cancer in an unscreened population:experience in a Nigerian teaching hospital.
Ojewola RW; Tijani KH; Jeje EA; Ogunjimi MA; Anunobi CC; Adesanya AO
West Afr J Med; 2013; 32(1):8-13. PubMed ID: 23613288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. An abnormal digital rectal examination is an independent predictor of Gleason > or =7 prostate cancer in men undergoing initial prostate biopsy: a prospective study of 790 men.
Borden LS; Wright JL; Kim J; Latchamsetty K; Porter CR
BJU Int; 2007 Mar; 99(3):559-63. PubMed ID: 17155976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. [Prospective validation of a nomogram predictive of a positive initial prostate biopsy].
Ramírez-Backhaus M; Bahilo P; Arlandis S; Santamaría Navarro C; Pontones Moreno JL; Jiménez-Cruz F
Actas Urol Esp; 2010 Jan; 34(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 20223131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The digital rectal examination (DRE) remains important - outcomes from a contemporary cohort of men undergoing an initial 12-18 core prostate needle biopsy.
Palmerola R; Smith P; Elliot V; Reese CT; Mahon FB; Harpster LE; Icitovic N; Raman JD
Can J Urol; 2012 Dec; 19(6):6542-7. PubMed ID: 23228289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. PSA density improves prediction of prostate cancer.
Verma A; St Onge J; Dhillon K; Chorneyko A
Can J Urol; 2014 Jun; 21(3):7312-21. PubMed ID: 24978363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Creation and internal validation of a biopsy avoidance prediction tool to aid in the choice of diagnostic approach in patients with prostate cancer suspicion.
Bhindi B; Jiang H; Poyet C; Hermanns T; Hamilton RJ; Li K; Toi A; Finelli A; Zlotta AR; van der Kwast TH; Evans A; Fleshner NE; Kulkarni GS
Urol Oncol; 2017 Oct; 35(10):604.e17-604.e24. PubMed ID: 28781111
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Does a Mobile Phone Depression-Screening App Motivate Mobile Phone Users With High Depressive Symptoms to Seek a Health Care Professional's Help?
BinDhim NF; Alanazi EM; Aljadhey H; Basyouni MH; Kowalski SR; Pont LG; Shaman AM; Trevena L; Alhawassi TM
J Med Internet Res; 2016 Jun; 18(6):e156. PubMed ID: 27349441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. A comparative performance analysis of total prostate-specific antigen, percentage free prostate-specific antigen, prostate-specific antigen velocity and urinary prostate cancer gene 3 in the first, second and third repeat prostate biopsy.
Auprich M; Augustin H; Budäus L; Kluth L; Mannweiler S; Shariat SF; Fisch M; Graefen M; Pummer K; Chun FK
BJU Int; 2012 Jun; 109(11):1627-35. PubMed ID: 21939492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Feasibility study of an EHR-integrated mobile shared decision making application.
Day FC; Pourhomayoun M; Keeves D; Lees AF; Sarrafzadeh M; Bell D; Pfeffer MA
Int J Med Inform; 2019 Apr; 124():24-30. PubMed ID: 30784423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Risk-based Patient Selection for Magnetic Resonance Imaging-targeted Prostate Biopsy after Negative Transrectal Ultrasound-guided Random Biopsy Avoids Unnecessary Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scans.
Alberts AR; Schoots IG; Bokhorst LP; van Leenders GJ; Bangma CH; Roobol MJ
Eur Urol; 2016 Jun; 69(6):1129-34. PubMed ID: 26651990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. A performance analysis of the presence of malignant circulating prostate cells as a predictive factor for the detection of prostate cancer in the first, second and third prostate biopsy.
Murray NP; Reyes E; Tapia P; Badinez L; Orellana N; Fuentealba C; Olivares R; Dueñas R
Arch Esp Urol; 2013 May; 66(4):335-41. PubMed ID: 23676536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Operating characteristics of prostate-specific antigen in men with an initial PSA level of 3.0 ng/ml or lower.
Thompson IM; Ankerst DP; Chi C; Lucia MS; Goodman PJ; Crowley JJ; Parnes HL; Coltman CA
JAMA; 2005 Jul; 294(1):66-70. PubMed ID: 15998892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Fluctuation in prostate cancer gene 3 (PCA3) score in men undergoing first or repeat prostate biopsies.
De Luca S; Passera R; Cappia S; Bollito E; Randone DF; Milillo A; Papotti M; Porpiglia F
BJU Int; 2014 Dec; 114(6b):E56-E61. PubMed ID: 24472071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Usefulness of pre-biopsy multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and clinical variables to reduce initial prostate biopsy in men with suspected clinically localized prostate cancer.
Numao N; Yoshida S; Komai Y; Ishii C; Kagawa M; Kijima T; Yokoyama M; Ishioka J; Matsuoka Y; Koga F; Saito K; Masuda H; Fujii Y; Kawakami S; Kihara K
J Urol; 2013 Aug; 190(2):502-8. PubMed ID: 23473904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Compliance of blood donation apps with mobile OS usability guidelines.
Ouhbi S; Fernández-Alemán JL; Pozo JR; Bajta ME; Toval A; Idri A
J Med Syst; 2015 Jun; 39(6):63. PubMed ID: 25845672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging outperforms the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial risk calculator in predicting clinically significant prostate cancer.
Salami SS; Vira MA; Turkbey B; Fakhoury M; Yaskiv O; Villani R; Ben-Levi E; Rastinehad AR
Cancer; 2014 Sep; 120(18):2876-82. PubMed ID: 24917122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. The Single-parameter, Structure-based IsoPSA Assay Demonstrates Improved Diagnostic Accuracy for Detection of Any Prostate Cancer and High-grade Prostate Cancer Compared to a Concentration-based Assay of Total Prostate-specific Antigen: A Preliminary Report.
Klein EA; Chait A; Hafron JM; Kernen KM; Manickam K; Stephenson AJ; Wagner M; Zhu H; Kestranek A; Zaslavsky B; Stovsky M
Eur Urol; 2017 Dec; 72(6):942-949. PubMed ID: 28396176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Who Uses Mobile Phone Health Apps and Does Use Matter? A Secondary Data Analytics Approach.
Carroll JK; Moorhead A; Bond R; LeBlanc WG; Petrella RJ; Fiscella K
J Med Internet Res; 2017 Apr; 19(4):e125. PubMed ID: 28428170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
