142 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3831944)
1. [Breast cancer screening 1984. I. Mammography as a challenge for radiology].
Buraczewski J
Nowotwory; 1985; 35(4):297-304. PubMed ID: 3831944
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Time trends in breast cancer screening rates in the OECD countries.
Saika K; Sobue T
Jpn J Clin Oncol; 2011 Apr; 41(4):591-2. PubMed ID: 21447696
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Digital mammography: clinical image evaluation.
Bassett LW; Hoyt AC; Oshiro T
Radiol Clin North Am; 2010 Sep; 48(5):903-15. PubMed ID: 20868893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mammographers' ranks shrink as demand for breast images grows.
Washam C
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2005 Jun; 97(11):792-3. PubMed ID: 15928296
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. [Value and risk of mammography. Possibilities of the development of screening studies in breast cancer].
Buraczewski J
Pol Tyg Lek; 1982 Nov; 37(46-47):1401-5. PubMed ID: 6763982
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Trends in breast cancer screening in Missouri from 1987 to 1995, and predictions for the years 2000 and 2010.
Sarr M; Simoes EJ; Murayi T; Figgs LT; Brownson RC
Mo Med; 1998 Dec; 95(12):663-9. PubMed ID: 9863343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Screening for breast cancer with mammography.
Sickles EA
Clin Imaging; 1991; 15(4):253-60. PubMed ID: 1742673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Screening for breast cancer in Poland].
Buraczewski J; Rajski J
Pol Tyg Lek; 1990 Aug 6-13; 45(32-33):674-6. PubMed ID: 2077511
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Introduction. The diffusion of screening programmes in Italy: 2007.
Zappa M; Naldoni C; Paci E; Segnan N; Vettorazzi C; Federici A
Epidemiol Prev; 2009; 33(3 Suppl 2):7-10. PubMed ID: 19776483
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Breast cancer: when and how often to get screened. How do you make sense of conflicting mammography guidelines?
Harv Womens Health Watch; 2013 Oct; 21(2):3. PubMed ID: 24432454
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Screening mammography--early detection or over-diagnosis? Contribution from Australian data.
Bell RJ
Climacteric; 2014 Dec; 17 Suppl 2():66-72. PubMed ID: 25224048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Screening mammography in the Tampa Bay area: current status and implications for the next decade.
Clark RA; King PS; Cox CE; Bromley J; Mauer K
J Fla Med Assoc; 1989 May; 76(5):449-53. PubMed ID: 2614349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Trends in screening mammograms for women 50 years of age and older--Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1987.
Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep; 1989 Mar; 38(9):137-40. PubMed ID: 2493130
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Leads from the MMWR. Trends in screening mammograms for women 50 years of age and older--Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1987.
JAMA; 1989 Apr; 261(14):2031-2. PubMed ID: 2926938
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Mammography screening, what does the future hold?
Serral G; Puigpinós-Riera R
Med Clin (Barc); 2018 Mar; 150(6):224-225. PubMed ID: 28751081
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Point/Counterpoint. Film mammography for breast cancer screening in younger women is no longer appropriate because of the demonstrated superiority of digital mammography for this age group.
Yaffe MJ; Barnes GT; Orton CG
Med Phys; 2006 Nov; 33(11):3979-82. PubMed ID: 17153375
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations for screening mammography: evidence-based medicine or the death of science?
Thrall JH
J Am Coll Radiol; 2010 Jan; 7(1):2-4. PubMed ID: 20129260
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. [Not Available].
Seifert H; Siebenhüner A
Praxis (Bern 1994); 2017 Jul; 106(14):745-752. PubMed ID: 28677487
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Reported drop in mammography : is this cause for concern?
Breen N; A Cronin K; Meissner HI; Taplin SH; Tangka FK; Tiro JA; McNeel TS
Cancer; 2007 Jun; 109(12):2405-9. PubMed ID: 17503429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Computer-aided detection, in its present form, is not an effective aid for screening mammography. For the proposition.
Nishikawa RM
Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):811-2. PubMed ID: 16696454
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
