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 *

194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8608287)

  • 1. Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of double versus single reading of mammograms.
    Brown J; Bryan S; Warren R
    BMJ; 1996 Mar; 312(7034):809-12. PubMed ID: 8608287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of two view versus one view procedures in London.
    Bryan S; Brown J; Warren R
    J Epidemiol Community Health; 1995 Feb; 49(1):70-8. PubMed ID: 7707010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Two view mammography at incident screens: cost effectiveness analysis of policy options.
    Johnston K; Brown J
    BMJ; 1999 Oct; 319(7217):1097-102. PubMed ID: 10531098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Introduction of additional double reading of mammograms by radiographers: effects on a biennial screening programme outcome.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; van Ineveld BM; Roumen RM; de Koning HJ
    Eur J Cancer; 2008 Jun; 44(9):1223-8. PubMed ID: 18400488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Double versus single reading of mammograms in a breast cancer screening programme: a cost-consequence analysis.
    Posso MC; Puig T; Quintana MJ; Solà-Roca J; Bonfill X
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Sep; 26(9):3262-71. PubMed ID: 26747264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
    Wald NJ; Murphy P; Major P; Parkes C; Townsend J; Frost C
    BMJ; 1995 Nov; 311(7014):1189-93. PubMed ID: 7488893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Incremental cost-effectiveness of double-reading mammograms.
    Leivo T; Salminen T; Sintonen H; Tuominen R; Auerma K; Partanen K; Saari U; Hakama M; Heinonen OP
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 1999 Apr; 54(3):261-7. PubMed ID: 10445425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters.
    Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Aug; 99(15):1162-70. PubMed ID: 17652282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Independent double reading of screening mammograms.
    Ciatto S; Del Turco MR; Morrone D; Catarzi S; Ambrogetti D; Cariddi A; Zappa M
    J Med Screen; 1995; 2(2):99-101. PubMed ID: 7497164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Cost-effectiveness of different reading and referral strategies in mammography screening in the Netherlands.
    Groenewoud JH; Otten JD; Fracheboud J; Draisma G; van Ineveld BM; Holland R; Verbeek AL; de Koning HJ;
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Apr; 102(2):211-8. PubMed ID: 17004116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of double reading in digital mammography screening: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Posso M; Puig T; Carles M; Rué M; Canelo-Aybar C; Bonfill X
    Eur J Radiol; 2017 Nov; 96():40-49. PubMed ID: 29103474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Breast screening using 2D-mammography or integrating digital breast tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) for single-reading or double-reading--evidence to guide future screening strategies.
    Houssami N; Macaskill P; Bernardi D; Caumo F; Pellegrini M; Brunelli S; Tuttobene P; Bricolo P; Fantò C; Valentini M; Ciatto S
    Eur J Cancer; 2014 Jul; 50(10):1799-1807. PubMed ID: 24746887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Modalities of reading of detection mammographies of the programme in the Bouches-du-Rhône. Results and costs 1990-1995].
    Séradour B; Wait S; Jacquemier J; Dubuc M; Piana L
    J Radiol; 1997 Jan; 78(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 9091620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening.
    Anderson ED; Muir BB; Walsh JS; Kirkpatrick AE
    Clin Radiol; 1994 Apr; 49(4):248-51. PubMed ID: 8162681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Is computer aided detection (CAD) cost effective in screening mammography? A model based on the CADET II study.
    Guerriero C; Gillan MG; Cairns J; Wallis MG; Gilbert FJ
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2011 Jan; 11():11. PubMed ID: 21241473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than non-blinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands.
    Klompenhouwer EG; Voogd AC; den Heeten GJ; Strobbe LJ; de Haan AF; Wauters CA; Broeders MJ; Duijm LE
    Eur J Cancer; 2015 Feb; 51(3):391-9. PubMed ID: 25573788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Cost-effectiveness analysis for breast cancer screening: double reading versus single + CAD reading.
    Sato M; Kawai M; Nishino Y; Shibuya D; Ohuchi N; Ishibashi T
    Breast Cancer; 2014 Sep; 21(5):532-41. PubMed ID: 23104393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mammography screening using independent double reading with consensus: is there a potential benefit for computer-aided detection?
    Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Hofvind S; Jahr G; Castellino RA
    Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):241-8. PubMed ID: 22287148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Just how valuable is double reporting in screening mammography?
    Denton ER; Field S
    Clin Radiol; 1997 Jun; 52(6):466-8. PubMed ID: 9202592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.