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 *

94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33497615)

  • 1. Impact of Time Awake and Hours Slept at Night on Radiologists' Mammogram Interpretations: Why We Must Not Burn Out on Radiologist Burnout.
    Covington MF
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2021 May; 18(5):739-740. PubMed ID: 33497615
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Impact of Hours Awake and Hours Slept at Night on Radiologists' Mammogram Interpretations.
    Alshabibi AS; Suleiman ME; Tapia KA; Heard R; Brennan PC
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2021 May; 18(5):730-738. PubMed ID: 33482116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms.
    Elmore JG; Wells CK; Lee CH; Howard DH; Feinstein AR
    N Engl J Med; 1994 Dec; 331(22):1493-9. PubMed ID: 7969300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Radiologists' interpretive efficiency and variability in true- and false-positive detection when screen-reading with tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) relative to standard mammography in population screening.
    Svahn TM; Macaskill P; Houssami N
    Breast; 2015 Dec; 24(6):687-93. PubMed ID: 26433751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. "Memory effect" in observer performance studies of mammograms.
    Hardesty LA; Ganott MA; Hakim CM; Cohen CS; Clearfield RJ; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 2005 Mar; 12(3):286-90. PubMed ID: 15766687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Impact of Breast Reader Assessment Strategy on mammographic radiologists' test reading performance.
    Suleiman WI; Rawashdeh MA; Lewis SJ; McEntee MF; Lee W; Tapia K; Brennan PC
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2016 Jun; 60(3):352-8. PubMed ID: 27062490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Career caseload predicts interobserver agreement on the final classification of a mammogram.
    Abdelrahman MA; Rawashdeh MA; McEntee M; Abu Tahoun L; Brennan P
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2019 Apr; 63(2):197-202. PubMed ID: 30706631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Decreasing radiologist burnout through informatics-based solutions.
    Simon AF; Holmes JH; Schwartz ES
    Clin Imaging; 2020 Feb; 59(2):167-171. PubMed ID: 31821974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. When the patient asks for the results of her mammogram, how should the radiologist reply?
    Hoffman NY; Janus J; Destounis S; Logan-Young W
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Mar; 162(3):597-9. PubMed ID: 8109504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Performance assessment for radiologists interpreting screening mammography.
    Woodard DB; Gelfand AE; Barlow WE; Elmore JG
    Stat Med; 2007 Mar; 26(7):1532-51. PubMed ID: 16847870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Factors associated with breast screening radiologists' annual mammogram reading volume in Italy.
    Morrone D; Giordano L; Artuso F; Bernardi D; Fedato C; Frigerio A; Giorgi D; Naldoni C; Saguatti G; Severi D; Taffurelli M; Terribile D; Ventura L; Bucchi L
    Radiol Med; 2016 Jul; 121(7):557-63. PubMed ID: 27033475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. iCAP: An Individualized Model Combining Gaze Parameters and Image-Based Features to Predict Radiologists' Decisions While Reading Mammograms.
    Gandomkar Z; Tay K; Ryder W; Brennan PC; Mello-Thoms C
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2017 May; 36(5):1066-1075. PubMed ID: 28055858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Characteristics of Radiologists' Clinical Practice Patterns by Career Stage.
    Rosenkrantz AB; Fleishon HB; Hudgins PA; Bender CE; Duszak R
    Acad Radiol; 2020 Feb; 27(2):262-268. PubMed ID: 31076329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of integrating 3D-mammography (digital breast tomosynthesis) with 2D-mammography on radiologists' true-positive and false-positive detection in a population breast screening trial.
    Bernardi D; Caumo F; Macaskill P; Ciatto S; Pellegrini M; Brunelli S; Tuttobene P; Bricolo P; Fantò C; Valentini M; Montemezzi S; Houssami N
    Eur J Cancer; 2014 May; 50(7):1232-8. PubMed ID: 24582915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Addressing Burnout in Radiologists.
    Chetlen AL; Chan TL; Ballard DH; Frigini LA; Hildebrand A; Kim S; Brian JM; Krupinski EA; Ganeshan D
    Acad Radiol; 2019 Apr; 26(4):526-533. PubMed ID: 30711406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Radiologists' interpretive skills in screening vs. diagnostic mammography: are they related?
    Elmore JG; Cook AJ; Bogart A; Carney PA; Geller BM; Taplin SH; Buist DS; Onega T; Lee CI; Miglioretti DL
    Clin Imaging; 2016; 40(6):1096-1103. PubMed ID: 27438069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Overnight resident interpretation of torso CT at a level 1 trauma center an analysis and review of the literature.
    Chung JH; Strigel RM; Chew AR; Albrecht E; Gunn ML
    Acad Radiol; 2009 Sep; 16(9):1155-60. PubMed ID: 19481962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Radiologist Burnout: Mission Accomplished.
    Czum JM
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2019 Oct; 16(10):1506-1508. PubMed ID: 31302054
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Reactions to uncertainty and the accuracy of diagnostic mammography.
    Carney PA; Yi JP; Abraham LA; Miglioretti DL; Aiello EJ; Gerrity MS; Reisch L; Berns EA; Sickles EA; Elmore JG
    J Gen Intern Med; 2007 Feb; 22(2):234-41. PubMed ID: 17356992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.