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.
2. Radiological aspects of the West London screening programme for breast neoplasms. Price JL; Nathan BE Proc R Soc Med; 1975 Jul; 68(7):438-40. PubMed ID: 1236548 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Use of non-medical screeners and effect of low dose on film quality in a breast screening campaign. Hartley G Proc R Soc Med; 1975 Jul; 68(7):437-8. PubMed ID: 1236547 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Lay screeners in mammographic survey programs. Dowdy AH; Lagasse LD; Roach P; Wilson D Radiology; 1970 Jun; 95(3):619-21. PubMed ID: 5442669 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. [Causes of erroneous interpretation of breast fluorograms in mass screening of women]. Dzhancharov DI Med Radiol (Mosk); 1980 Apr; 25(4):74-5. PubMed ID: 7382765 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Declining screening mammography rates: a multigenerational loss of opportunity? Carlos RC AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Feb; 192(2):388-9. PubMed ID: 19155399 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Report of the "ad hoc" committee on mammography rapport du comite "ad hoc" sur la mammographie. Léger JL; Naimark AP; Béique RA; McFarlane DV; Miller S; Miller AB J Can Assoc Radiol; 1974 Mar; 25(1):3-21. PubMed ID: 4595875 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. [Quality control of mammography]. Endo T Nihon Rinsho; 2007 Jun; 65 Suppl 6():324-7. PubMed ID: 17682173 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Preliminary evaluation of absorbed dose in mammography. Six views. Palmer RC; Egan RL; Barrett BJ Radiology; 1970 May; 95(2):395-7. PubMed ID: 5439449 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of roentgen exposure in mammography. I. Six views. Gilbertson JD; Randall MG; Fingerhut AG Radiology; 1970 May; 95(2):383-94. PubMed ID: 5439448 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparative studies on film-, xeroradio- and ultrasound-mammography of breast tumor. Inada G; Fujita S; Ishizaki M Nagoya Med J; 1969 Dec; 15(4):187-90. PubMed ID: 5373047 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Some experiences with mammography with a brief review on recent trends and new techniques of examination of the breast. Khoo FY; Boon CK; Vaithilingam K; Huay LH Singapore Med J; 1968 Dec; 9(4):289-300. PubMed ID: 5728869 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Mammography at reduced doses: present performance and future possibilities. Muntz EP; Wilkinson E; George FW AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1980 Apr; 134(4):741-7. PubMed ID: 6767360 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Proper film emulsion for mammography. Barnette PA Radiol Technol; 1972 May; 43(6):321-8. PubMed ID: 4670968 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Xerography: a new horizon in mammography. Milbrath JR; Deeths TM Wis Med J; 1974 Apr; 73(4):S38-40. PubMed ID: 4821718 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Mammography: will adequate manpower exist? D'Orsi CJ Radiol Clin North Am; 2004 Sep; 42(5):975-8, viii. PubMed ID: 15337429 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]