231 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34156300)
1. Radiologist Characteristics Associated with Interpretive Performance of Screening Mammography: A National Mammography Database (NMD) Study.
Lee CS; Moy L; Hughes D; Golden D; Bhargavan-Chatfield M; Hemingway J; Geras A; Duszak R; Rosenkrantz AB
Radiology; 2021 Sep; 300(3):518-528. PubMed ID: 34156300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Screening mammographic performance by race and age in the National Mammography Database: 29,479,665 screening mammograms from 13,181,241 women.
Lee CS; Goldman L; Grimm LJ; Liu IX; Simanowith M; Rosenberg R; Zuley M; Moy L
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2024 Feb; 203(3):599-612. PubMed ID: 37897646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Criteria for identifying radiologists with acceptable screening mammography interpretive performance on basis of multiple performance measures.
Miglioretti DL; Ichikawa L; Smith RA; Bassett LW; Feig SA; Monsees B; Parikh JR; Rosenberg RD; Sickles EA; Carney PA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Apr; 204(4):W486-91. PubMed ID: 25794100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Screening Digital Mammography Recall Rate: Does It Change with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Experience?
DiPrete O; Lourenco AP; Baird GL; Mainiero MB
Radiology; 2018 Mar; 286(3):838-844. PubMed ID: 29173123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Screening Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
Lehman CD; Arao RF; Sprague BL; Lee JM; Buist DS; Kerlikowske K; Henderson LM; Onega T; Tosteson AN; Rauscher GH; Miglioretti DL
Radiology; 2017 Apr; 283(1):49-58. PubMed ID: 27918707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Mammogram-based Deep Learning and Traditional Breast Cancer Risk Models in Patients Who Underwent Supplemental Screening with MRI.
Lamb LR; Mercaldo SF; Ghaderi K; Carney A; Lehman CD
Radiology; 2023 Sep; 308(3):e223077. PubMed ID: 37724967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Diagnostic Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
Sprague BL; Arao RF; Miglioretti DL; Henderson LM; Buist DS; Onega T; Rauscher GH; Lee JM; Tosteson AN; Kerlikowske K; Lehman CD;
Radiology; 2017 Apr; 283(1):59-69. PubMed ID: 28244803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening in Women with Dense Breasts and Negative Mammography: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Hussein H; Abbas E; Keshavarzi S; Fazelzad R; Bukhanov K; Kulkarni S; Au F; Ghai S; Alabousi A; Freitas V
Radiology; 2023 Mar; 306(3):e221785. PubMed ID: 36719288
[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. Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists' characteristics associated with accuracy.
Elmore JG; Jackson SL; Abraham L; Miglioretti DL; Carney PA; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Kerlikowske K; Onega T; Rosenberg RD; Sickles EA; Buist DS
Radiology; 2009 Dec; 253(3):641-51. PubMed ID: 19864507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Risk-Based Screening Mammography for Women Aged <40: Outcomes From the National Mammography Database.
Lee CS; Ashih H; Sengupta D; Sickles EA; Zuley M; Pisano E
J Am Coll Radiol; 2020 Mar; 17(3):368-376. PubMed ID: 31541655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Why Start Now? Retrospective Study Evaluating Baseline Screening Mammography in Patients Age 60 and Older.
Chieh AY; Willis JG; Carroll CM; Mobley AA; Li Y; Li M; Woodard S
Curr Probl Diagn Radiol; 2024; 53(1):62-67. PubMed ID: 37704485
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Interpretive Performance and Inter-Observer Agreement on Digital Mammography Test Sets.
Kim SH; Lee EH; Jun JK; Kim YM; Chang YW; Lee JH; Kim HW; Choi EJ;
Korean J Radiol; 2019 Feb; 20(2):218-224. PubMed ID: 30672161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Are radiologists' goals for mammography accuracy consistent with published recommendations?
Jackson SL; Cook AJ; Miglioretti DL; Carney PA; Geller BM; Onega T; Rosenberg RD; Brenner RJ; Elmore JG
Acad Radiol; 2012 Mar; 19(3):289-95. PubMed ID: 22130089
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The National Mammography Database: Preliminary Data.
Lee CS; Bhargavan-Chatfield M; Burnside ES; Nagy P; Sickles EA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Apr; 206(4):883-90. PubMed ID: 26866649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effect of previous benign breast biopsy on the interpretive performance of subsequent screening mammography.
Taplin SH; Abraham L; Geller BM; Yankaskas BC; Buist DS; Smith-Bindman R; Lehman C; Weaver D; Carney PA; Barlow WE
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2010 Jul; 102(14):1040-51. PubMed ID: 20601590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice.
Greenberg JS; Javitt MC; Katzen J; Michael S; Holland AE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Sep; 203(3):687-93. PubMed ID: 24918774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Do Reader Characteristics Affect Diagnostic Efficacy in Screening Mammography? A Systematic Review.
Wong DJ; Gandomkar Z; Lewis S; Reed W; Suleiman M; Siviengphanom S; Ekpo E
Clin Breast Cancer; 2023 Apr; 23(3):e56-e67. PubMed ID: 36792458
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities.
Jackson SL; Taplin SH; Sickles EA; Abraham L; Barlow WE; Carney PA; Geller B; Berns EA; Cutter GR; Elmore JG
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2009 Jun; 101(11):814-27. PubMed ID: 19470953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
