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.
108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9202592)
1. 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]
2. 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]
4. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: report on the first 4 years of mammography provided to medically underserved women. May DS; Lee NC; Nadel MR; Henson RM; Miller DS AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Jan; 170(1):97-104. PubMed ID: 9423608 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms. Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Stapleton S; Young K; Castellino RA AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):377-84. PubMed ID: 17242245 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of radiographer/radiologist double film reading with single reading in breast cancer screening. Pauli R; Hammond S; Cooke J; Ansell J J Med Screen; 1996; 3(1):18-22. PubMed ID: 8861046 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography. Ko JM; Nicholas MJ; Mendel JB; Slanetz PJ AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Dec; 187(6):1483-91. PubMed ID: 17114541 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme. Blanks RG; Wallis MG; Moss SM J Med Screen; 1998; 5(4):195-201. PubMed ID: 9934650 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Mammography screening. One versus two views and independent double reading. Thurfjell E Acta Radiol; 1994 Jul; 35(4):345-50. PubMed ID: 8011383 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. The visibility of cancer on earlier mammograms in a population-based screening programme. Saarenmaa I; Salminen T; Geiger U; Holli K; Isola J; Kärkkäinen A; Pakkanen J; Piironen A; Salo A; Hakama M Eur J Cancer; 1999 Jul; 35(7):1118-22. PubMed ID: 10533457 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience. Destounis SV; DiNitto P; Logan-Young W; Bonaccio E; Zuley ML; Willison KM Radiology; 2004 Aug; 232(2):578-84. PubMed ID: 15229350 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
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. [The assessment of the impact of a double reading by expert readers in a mass mammographic study]. Brancato B; Ciatto S; Bricolo D; Bonardi R; Ambrogetti D; Zappa M; Miccinesi G; Tonegutti M; Pistolesi GF Radiol Med; 2000; 100(1-2):21-3. PubMed ID: 11109446 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships. Esserman L; Cowley H; Eberle C; Kirkpatrick A; Chang S; Berbaum K; Gale A J Natl Cancer Inst; 2002 Mar; 94(5):369-75. PubMed ID: 11880475 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Double reading of mammography screening films--one radiologist or two? Anttinen I; Pamilo M; Soiva M; Roiha M Clin Radiol; 1993 Dec; 48(6):414-21. PubMed ID: 8293648 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]