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.
87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 5442669)
1. 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]
2. 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]
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. [Quality control of mammography]. Endo T Nihon Rinsho; 2007 Jun; 65 Suppl 6():324-7. PubMed ID: 17682173 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Effects of a program to train radiologic technologists to identify abnormalities on mammograms. Bassett LW; Hollatz-Brown AJ; Bastani R; Pearce JG; Hirji K; Chen L Radiology; 1995 Jan; 194(1):189-92. PubMed ID: 7997550 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
9. [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]
10. High quality mammographic films now available, but is mass screening justified? Can Med Assoc J; 1970 Apr; 102(8):890-1. PubMed ID: 5445059 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Mammographic screening for breast cancer. Gershon-Cohen J; Ingleby H; Berger SM; Forman M; Curcio BM Radiology; 1967 Apr; 88(4):663-7. PubMed ID: 6020928 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Focal spot sizes in dual-track Mo and Rh target mammographic X-ray tubes. Law J; Robinson A; Underwood AC Br J Radiol; 1996 Nov; 69(827):1077-8. PubMed ID: 8958034 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Current realities of delivering mammography services in the community: do challenges with staffing and scheduling exist? D'Orsi C; Tu SP; Nakano C; Carney PA; Abraham LA; Taplin SH; Hendrick RE; Cutter GR; Berns E; Barlow WE; Elmore JG Radiology; 2005 May; 235(2):391-5. PubMed ID: 15798153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Mammographic evaluation of the postsurgical and irradiated breast. Briggs J Radiol Technol; 1997; 68(4):287-304; quiz 305-8. PubMed ID: 9085414 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. [Combined clinical and mammographic mass screening in breast cancer]. Lányi M; László G; Farkas M Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Nuklearmed; 1970 Jan; 11(1):18-26. PubMed ID: 4324683 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]