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 *

244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8041052)

  • 1. Breast cancer detection: improving the efficacy of screening mammography.
    Brecheisen NL; Snyder TE
    Kans Med; 1994 Apr; 95(4):90-3. PubMed ID: 8041052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 2. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 50 to 59 years.
    Miller AB; Baines CJ; To T; Wall C
    CMAJ; 1992 Nov; 147(10):1477-88. PubMed ID: 1423088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 1. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40 to 49 years.
    Miller AB; Baines CJ; To T; Wall C
    CMAJ; 1992 Nov; 147(10):1459-76. PubMed ID: 1423087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Screening younger women at risk for breast cancer.
    Vogel VG
    J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1994; (16):55-60. PubMed ID: 7999470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Mammography screening as early detection measure. Pro].
    Koch MG
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 1996; 259 Suppl 1():S161-77. PubMed ID: 9133270
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Development of a protocol for evaluation of mammographic surveillance services in women under 50 with a family history of breast cancer.
    Mackay J; Rogers C; Fielder H; Blamey R; Macmillan D; Boggis C; Brown J; Pharoah PD; Moss S; Day NE; Myles J; Austoker J; Gray J; Cuzick J; Duffy SW
    J Epidemiol Biostat; 2001; 6(5):365-9; discussion 371-5. PubMed ID: 11822726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The Stockholm Mammographic Screening Trial: Risks and benefits in age group 40-49 years.
    Frisell J; Lidbrink E
    J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr; 1997; (22):49-51. PubMed ID: 9709275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Screening mammography for women under 50: considerations for fully informed decision making.
    Ernster VL
    Womens Health; 1996; 2(4):257-60; discussion 261-6. PubMed ID: 9453858
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The impact of alternative practices on the cost and quality of mammographic screening in the United States.
    Burnside E; Belkora J; Esserman L
    Clin Breast Cancer; 2001 Jul; 2(2):145-52. PubMed ID: 11899786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Cancer of the breast: mass screening by mammography is not justified].
    Colin C
    Rev Med Liege; 1998 Apr; 53(4):212-3. PubMed ID: 9641016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mammography utilization, public health impact, and cost-effectiveness in the United States.
    White E; Urban N; Taylor V
    Annu Rev Public Health; 1993; 14():605-33. PubMed ID: 8323604
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Economic savings and costs of periodic mammographic screening in the workplace.
    Griffiths RI; McGrath MM; Vogel VG
    Oncology (Williston Park); 1996 Mar; 10(3):285-9; discussion: 289-94. PubMed ID: 8820444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dutch digital breast cancer screening: implications for breast cancer care.
    Timmers JM; den Heeten GJ; Adang EM; Otten JD; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ
    Eur J Public Health; 2012 Dec; 22(6):925-9. PubMed ID: 22158996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A cost utility analysis of mammography screening in Australia.
    Hall J; Gerard K; Salkeld G; Richardson J
    Soc Sci Med; 1992 May; 34(9):993-1004. PubMed ID: 1631612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Performance goals for an adjunct diagnostic test to reduce unnecessary biopsies after screening mammography: analysis of costs, benefits, and consequences.
    Lee CI; Bensink ME; Berry K; Musa Z; Bodnar C; Dann R; Jarvik JG; Lehman CD; Ramsey SD
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2013 Dec; 10(12):924-30. PubMed ID: 24295942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging.
    Plevritis SK; Kurian AW; Sigal BM; Daniel BL; Ikeda DM; Stockdale FE; Garber AM
    JAMA; 2006 May; 295(20):2374-84. PubMed ID: 16720823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Mammographic screening for breast cancer--a cost-benefit analysis].
    Erichsen GG
    Nord Med; 1990; 105(2):64-6. PubMed ID: 2106129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [The relationship between health gain and effort in mass screening for breast cancer].
    van Dongen JA; Coebergh JW; de Koning HJ
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 1997 Nov; 141(47):2277-80. PubMed ID: 9550810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Screening mammography and public health policy: the need for perspective.
    Wright CJ; Mueller CB
    Lancet; 1995 Jul; 346(8966):29-32. PubMed ID: 7603143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Breast cancer screening lacks effectiveness].
    Merkelbach JW
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2002 Jan; 146(3):139-40. PubMed ID: 11826675
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.