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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 39162635)

  • 1. Pain Experience and Image Quality with Curved versus Standard Compression for Breast Cancer Screening Mammography: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
    van der Waal D; van Landsveld-Verhoeven C; Tetteroo E; van Engen RE; Sechopoulos I; Pijnappel RM; Broeders MJM
    Radiology; 2024 Aug; 312(2):e232680. PubMed ID: 39162635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Breast compression and experienced pain during mammography by use of three different compression paddles.
    Moshina N; Sebuødegård S; Evensen KT; Hantho C; Iden KA; Hofvind S
    Eur J Radiol; 2019 Jun; 115():59-65. PubMed ID: 31084760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of pressure-controlled mammography compression paddles with respect to force-controlled compression paddles in clinical practice.
    Jeukens CRLPN; van Dijk T; Berben C; Wildberger JE; Lobbes MBI
    Eur Radiol; 2019 May; 29(5):2545-2552. PubMed ID: 30617472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Experience of pain during mammographic screening by three different compression paddles.
    Moshina N; Sagstad S; Holen ÅS; Backmann HA; Westermann LC; Hofvind S
    Radiography (Lond); 2023 Aug; 29(5):903-910. PubMed ID: 37453253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of a flexible versus a rigid breast compression paddle: pain experience, projected breast area, radiation dose and technical image quality.
    Broeders MJ; Ten Voorde M; Veldkamp WJ; van Engen RE; van Landsveld-Verhoeven C; 't Jong-Gunneman MN; de Win J; Greve KD; Paap E; den Heeten GJ
    Eur Radiol; 2015 Mar; 25(3):821-9. PubMed ID: 25504427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Patient-centred care with self-compression mammography in clinical practice: a randomized trial compared to standard compression.
    Iotti V; Giorgi Rossi P; Canovi L; Guberti M; Nitrosi A; Lippolis DG; Marchesi V; Besutti G; Ottone M; Vacondio R; Pattacini P;
    Eur Radiol; 2023 Jan; 33(1):450-460. PubMed ID: 35869315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Mammography in females with an implanted medical device: impact on image quality, pain and anxiety.
    Paap E; Witjes M; van Landsveld-Verhoeven C; Pijnappel RM; Maas AH; Broeders MJ
    Br J Radiol; 2016 Oct; 89(1066):20160142. PubMed ID: 27452263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Self-compression Technique vs Standard Compression in Mammography: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
    Henrot P; Boisserie-Lacroix M; Boute V; Troufléau P; Boyer B; Lesanne G; Gillon V; Desandes E; Netter E; Saadate M; Tardivon A; Grentzinger C; Salleron J; Oldrini G
    JAMA Intern Med; 2019 Mar; 179(3):407-414. PubMed ID: 30715083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mammographic compression--a need for mechanical standardization.
    Branderhorst W; de Groot JE; Highnam R; Chan A; Böhm-Vélez M; Broeders MJ; den Heeten GJ; Grimbergen CA
    Eur J Radiol; 2015 Apr; 84(4):596-602. PubMed ID: 25596915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A novel approach to mammographic breast compression: Improved standardization and reduced discomfort by controlling pressure instead of force.
    de Groot JE; Broeders MJ; Branderhorst W; den Heeten GJ; Grimbergen CA
    Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081901. PubMed ID: 23927315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Artificial intelligence-supported screen reading versus standard double reading in the Mammography Screening with Artificial Intelligence trial (MASAI): a clinical safety analysis of a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority, single-blinded, screening accuracy study.
    Lång K; Josefsson V; Larsson AM; Larsson S; Högberg C; Sartor H; Hofvind S; Andersson I; Rosso A
    Lancet Oncol; 2023 Aug; 24(8):936-944. PubMed ID: 37541274
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. One-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (MBTST): a prospective, population-based, diagnostic accuracy study.
    Zackrisson S; Lång K; Rosso A; Johnson K; Dustler M; Förnvik D; Förnvik H; Sartor H; Timberg P; Tingberg A; Andersson I
    Lancet Oncol; 2018 Nov; 19(11):1493-1503. PubMed ID: 30322817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Does the patient-assisted compression mode affect the mammography quality? A within-woman randomized controlled trial.
    Perez-Leon D; Posso M; Louro J; Ejarque B; Arranz M; Arenas N; Maiques J; Martínez J; Maciá F; Román M; Rodríguez-Arana A; Castells X; Alcántara R
    Eur Radiol; 2022 Nov; 32(11):7470-7479. PubMed ID: 35536391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Mammography with and without radiolucent positioning sheets: Comparison of projected breast area, pain experience, radiation dose and technical image quality.
    Timmers J; Voorde MT; Engen RE; Landsveld-Verhoeven Cv; Pijnappel R; Greve KD; Heeten GJ; Broeders MJ
    Eur J Radiol; 2015 Oct; 84(10):1903-9. PubMed ID: 26272030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of breast compression pressure on the performance of population-based mammography screening.
    Holland K; Sechopoulos I; Mann RM; den Heeten GJ; van Gils CH; Karssemeijer N
    Breast Cancer Res; 2017 Nov; 19(1):126. PubMed ID: 29183348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Breast compression and reported pain during mammographic screening.
    Moshina N; Sagstad S; Sebuødegård S; Waade GG; Gran E; Music J; Hofvind S
    Radiography (Lond); 2020 May; 26(2):133-139. PubMed ID: 32052779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Breast compression across consecutive examinations among females participating in BreastScreen Norway.
    Waade GG; Sebuødegård S; Hogg P; Hofvind S
    Br J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 91(1090):20180209. PubMed ID: 29927636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Technical Note: Validation of two methods to determine contact area between breast and compression paddle in mammography.
    Branderhorst W; de Groot JE; van Lier MGJTB; Highnam RP; den Heeten GJ; Grimbergen CA
    Med Phys; 2017 Aug; 44(8):4040-4044. PubMed ID: 28569996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Clinical validation of a pressure-standardized compression mammography system.
    den Boer D; Dam-Vervloet LAJ; Boomsma MF; de Boer E; van Dalen JA; Poot L
    Eur J Radiol; 2018 Aug; 105():251-254. PubMed ID: 30017290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Are mammography image acquisition factors, compression pressure and paddle tilt, associated with breast cancer detection in screening?
    Hudson SM; Wilkinson LS; De Stavola BL; Dos-Santos-Silva I
    Br J Radiol; 2023 Oct; 96(1150):20230085. PubMed ID: 37660396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.