238 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9641016)
1. [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]
2. [Mass screening of breast cancer: response and justification].
Bartsch P; Gordenne W
Rev Med Liege; 1998 Apr; 53(4):214-5. PubMed ID: 9641017
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Evidence of efficacy of mammographic screening for women in their forties.
Dupont WD
Cancer; 1994 Aug; 74(4):1204-6. PubMed ID: 8055438
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. [Economic approach to breast cancer screening in Belgium].
Autier P; Grivegnée AR
Rev Med Brux; 1995; 16(4):326-9. PubMed ID: 7481252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [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]
6. Higher mammography screening costs without appreciable clinical benefit: the case of digital mammography.
Kerlikowske K; Hubbard R; Tosteson AN
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2014 Aug; 106(8):. PubMed ID: 25031310
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. [Cost-effectiveness analysis of breast cancer screening with mammography].
Iinuma T
Nihon Rinsho; 2007 Jun; 65 Suppl 6():226-8. PubMed ID: 17682158
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. [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]
9. [Screening for breast cancer: the time of decision].
Gordenne W
J Belge Radiol; 1998 Apr; 81(2):92-5. PubMed ID: 9640877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mammography screening: prospects and opportunity costs.
Navarro AM; Kaplan RM
Womens Health; 1996; 2(4):209-33. PubMed ID: 9421557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A critical review of screening for breast cancer.
Del Turco MR
Recent Results Cancer Res; 1996; 140():123-30. PubMed ID: 8787055
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Cost-effectiveness analysis of mammography screening in Hong Kong Chinese using state-transition Markov modelling.
Wong IO; Kuntz KM; Cowling BJ; Lam CL; Leung GM
Hong Kong Med J; 2010 Jun; 16 Suppl 3():38-41. PubMed ID: 20601733
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. [Offering mammography is beneficial in the long run].
Cederblom S
Lakartidningen; 1995 Dec; 92(51-52):4865-8. PubMed ID: 8544497
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. [Mammographic screening does not reduce breast cancer mortality].
Sjönell G; Ståhle L
Lakartidningen; 1999 Feb; 96(8):904-5, 908-13. PubMed ID: 10089737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Screening for breast cancer in India--is it an appropriate strategy?
Moss S
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2008 Sep; 100(18):1270-1. PubMed ID: 18780862
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. What are the benefits and costs of screening mammograms on Kentucky women aged 40-49?
Spratt JS; Gaines BM; Aaron WS; Cerrito P
J Surg Oncol; 1996 Oct; 63(2):71-6. PubMed ID: 8888797
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
