142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38100062)
1. Surgical and Radiology Trainees' Proficiency in Reading Mammograms: the Importance of Education for Cancer Localisation.
Wells JB; Lewis SJ; Barron M; Trieu PD
J Cancer Educ; 2024 Apr; 39(2):186-193. PubMed ID: 38100062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Influences of Radiology Trainees on Screening Mammography Interpretation.
Hawley JR; Taylor CR; Cubbison AM; Erdal BS; Yildiz VO; Carkaci S
J Am Coll Radiol; 2016 May; 13(5):554-61. PubMed ID: 26924162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Radiologist Self-training: a Study of Cancer Detection when Reading Mammograms at Work Clinics or Workshops.
Lewis SJ; Borecky N; Li T; Barron ML; Brennan P; Trieu PDY
J Cancer Educ; 2023 Apr; 38(2):571-577. PubMed ID: 35511333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Using computer-extracted image features for modeling of error-making patterns in detection of mammographic masses among radiology residents.
Zhang J; Lo JY; Kuzmiak CM; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Mazurowski MA
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091907. PubMed ID: 25186394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Does Breast Imaging Experience During Residency Translate Into Improved Initial Performance in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis?
Zhang J; Grimm LJ; Lo JY; Johnson KS; Ghate SV; Walsh R; Mazurowski MA
J Am Coll Radiol; 2015 Jul; 12(7):728-32. PubMed ID: 26143567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Modeling false positive error making patterns in radiology trainees for improved mammography education.
Zhang J; Silber JI; Mazurowski MA
J Biomed Inform; 2015 Apr; 54():50-7. PubMed ID: 25640462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Radiologists' performance in reading digital breast tomosynthesis with and without synthesized views for cancer detection.
Trieu PDY; Noakes J; Li T; Borecky N; Brennan PC; Barron ML; Lewis SJ
Br J Radiol; 2023 Apr; 96(1145):20220704. PubMed ID: 36802348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. NLM tele-educational application for radiologists to interpret mammography.
Wu M; Zheng Y; North M; Pisano E
Proc AMIA Symp; 2002; ():909-13. PubMed ID: 12463957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Changes in cancer detection and false-positive recall in mammography using artificial intelligence: a retrospective, multireader study.
Kim HE; Kim HH; Han BK; Kim KH; Han K; Nam H; Lee EH; Kim EK
Lancet Digit Health; 2020 Mar; 2(3):e138-e148. PubMed ID: 33334578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Radiology resident mammography training: interpretation difficulty and error-making patterns.
Grimm LJ; Kuzmiak CM; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Mazurowski MA
Acad Radiol; 2014 Jul; 21(7):888-92. PubMed ID: 24928157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Improving radiologist's ability in identifying particular abnormal lesions on mammograms through training test set with immediate feedback.
Trieu PDY; Lewis SJ; Li T; Ho K; Wong DJ; Tran OTM; Puslednik L; Black D; Brennan PC
Sci Rep; 2021 May; 11(1):9899. PubMed ID: 33972611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reader characteristics and mammogram features associated with breast imaging reporting scores.
Trieu PDY; Lewis SJ; Li T; Ho K; Tapia KA; Brennan PC
Br J Radiol; 2020 Oct; 93(1114):20200363. PubMed ID: 32730088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Predicting error in detecting mammographic masses among radiology trainees using statistical models based on BI-RADS features.
Grimm LJ; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Kuzmiak CM; Kim C; Mazurowski MA
Med Phys; 2014 Mar; 41(3):031909. PubMed ID: 24593727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. When radiologists perform best: the learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation.
Miglioretti DL; Gard CC; Carney PA; Onega TL; Buist DS; Sickles EA; Kerlikowske K; Rosenberg RD; Yankaskas BC; Geller BM; Elmore JG
Radiology; 2009 Dec; 253(3):632-40. PubMed ID: 19789234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Mammography self-evaluation online test for screening readers: an Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) initiative.
Brancato B; Peruzzi F; Saieva C; Schiaffino S; Catarzi S; Risso GG; Cozzi A; Carriero S; Calabrese M; Montemezzi S; Zuiani C; Sardanelli F
Eur Radiol; 2022 Mar; 32(3):1624-1633. PubMed ID: 34480624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Time course of perception and decision making during mammographic interpretation.
Nodine CF; Mello-Thoms C; Kundel HL; Weinstein SP
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Oct; 179(4):917-23. PubMed ID: 12239037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Breast cancers missed by screening radiologists can be detected by reading mammograms at a distance.
Schreutelkamp IL; Kwee RM; Veekmans P; Adriaensen MEAPM
Ir J Med Sci; 2019 Feb; 188(1):289-293. PubMed ID: 29725926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
