NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on New Approaches to Early Detection and Diagnosis of Breast Cancer; Herdman R, Norton L, editors. Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis: A Breast Cancer Research Foundation and Institute of Medicine Symposium. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2005.

Cover of Saving Women's Lives

Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis: A Breast Cancer Research Foundation and Institute of Medicine Symposium.

Show details

References

  1. Adcock K. Initiative to improve mammogram interpretation. The Permanente Journal. 2004;8(2):12–18.
  2. Astley S, Mistry T, Boggis CRM, et al. Should we use humans or a machine to prescreen mammograms? In: Peitgen HO, editor. Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Digital Mammography. Heidelberg: Springer; 2002. pp. 476–480.
  3. Bassett LW, Monsees BS, Smith RA, et al. Survey of radiology residents: breast imaging training and attitudes. Radiology. 2003;227(3):862–9. [PubMed: 12728182]
  4. Beam CA, Layde PM, Sullivan DC. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by U.S. radiologists. Findings from a national sample. Arch. Intern. Med. 1996;156(2):209–13. [PubMed: 8546556]
  5. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA. Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammograms. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95(4):282–90. [PubMed: 12591984]
  6. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA, et al. Evaluation of proscriptive health care policy implementation in screening mammography. Radiology. 2003;229(2):534–40. [PubMed: 14595152]
  7. Berlin L, Berlin JW. Malpractice and radiologists in Cook County, IL: trends in 20 years of litigation. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 1995;165(4):781–8. [PubMed: 7676967]
  8. Bhargavan M, Sunshine JH. Workload of radiologists in the United States in 1998-1999 and trends since and 1995-1996. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002;179(5):1123–8. [PubMed: 12388484]
  9. Billi JE, Wise CG, Bills EA, et al. Potential effects of managed care on specialty practice at a university medical center. New Eng. J. Med. 1995;333(15):979–83. [PubMed: 7666919]
  10. Black WC, Nease RF Jr., Tosteson AN. Perceptions of breast cancer risk and screening effectiveness in women younger than 50 years of age. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1995;87(10):720–31. [PubMed: 7563149]
  11. British Columbia Cancer Agency. Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia 2001/2002 Annual Report. Vancouver, British Columbia: 2003.
  12. Broeders MJM. Impact of Breast Cancer Service Screening; Facts and Uncertainties. PrintPartners, Ipskamp; Enschede: 2004. p. 105. Chapter 8.
  13. Burnside E, Belkora J, Esserman L. The impact of alternative practices on the cost and quality of mammographic screening in the United States. Clin. Breast Cancer. 2001;2(2):145–52. [PubMed: 11899786]
  14. Coleman MP, Gatta G, Verdecchia A, et al. EUROCARE-3 summary: cancer survival in Europe at the end of the 20th century. Ann. Oncol. 2003;14(Suppl 5):128–49. [PubMed: 14684503]
  15. Cummings SR, Duong T, Kenyon E, et al. Serum estradiol level and risk of breast cancer during treatment with raloxifene. JAMA. 2002;287(2):216–20. [PubMed: 11779264]
  16. Curry SL, Taplin SH, Anderman C, et al. A randomized trial of the impact of risk assessment and feedback on participation in mammography screening. Prev. Med. 1993;22(3):350–60. [PubMed: 8327418]
  17. Enzmann DR, Anglada P, Haviley C, et al. Providing professional mammography services: financial analysis. Radiology. 2001;219(2):467–73. [PubMed: 11323474]
  18. Fletcher SW, Harris RP, Gonzalez JJ, et al. Increasing mammography utilization: a controlled study. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1993;85(2):112–20. [PubMed: 8418300]
  19. Fryback DL, Thornbury JM. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med. Decis. Making. 1991;11(2):88–94. [PubMed: 1907710]
  20. Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1989;81(24):1879–86. [PubMed: 2593165]
  21. Gilliland FD, Rosenberg RD, Hunt WD, et al. Patterns of mammography use among Hispanic, American Indian, and Non-Hispanic white women in New Mexico, 1994-1997. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2000;152(5):432–7. [PubMed: 10981456]
  22. Hillman BJ, Fajardo LL, Hunter TB, et al. Mammogram interpretation by physician assistants. Am. J. Roentgenol. 1987;149(5):907–12. [PubMed: 2890288]
  23. Hunt KA, Rosen EL, Sickles EA. Outcome analysis for women undergoing annual versus biennial screening mammography: a review of 24,211 examinations. Am. J. Roentgenol. 1999;173(2):285–9. [PubMed: 10430120]
  24. Hutton BJ, Brad EK, Chen JH, et al. Breast Cancer—Screening Data for Assessing Quality of Services—New York, 2000-2003. MMWR. 2004;53(21):455–7. [PubMed: 15175570]
  25. Institute of Medicine. Breast Cancer: Setting Priorities of Effectiveness Research. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1990.
  26. Institute of Medicine. A Review of the Department of Defense Program for Breast Cancer Research. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1997.
  27. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2001. [PubMed: 11549951]
  28. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. Mammography and Beyond: Technologies for the Early Detection of Breast Cancer. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 2001.
  29. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. Large-Scale Biomedical Science: Exploring Strategies for Future Research. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2003.
  30. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. Meeting Psychosocial Needs of Women with Breast Cancer. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2004.
  31. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. Saving Women's Lives, Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press; 2005.
  32. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Breast cancer screening. Vol. 7. Lyons, France: IARC Press; 2002.
  33. Kan L, Olivotto IA, Warren Burhenne LJ, et al. Standardized abnormal interpretation and cancer detection ratios to assess reading volume and reader performance in a breast screening program. Radiology. 2000;215(2):563–7. [PubMed: 10796940]
  34. Kaye AD. Mammography and Monkey Bars. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 2004;1(6):379–80. [PubMed: 17411610]
  35. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. New Eng. J. Med. 2004;351(5):427–500. [PubMed: 15282350]
  36. Le Naour F, Misek DE, Krause MC, et al. Proteomics-based identification of RS/DJ-1 as a novel circulating tumor antigen in breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2001;7(11):3325–7. [PubMed: 11705844]
  37. Meissner HI, Smith RA, Rimer BK, et al. Promoting cancer screening: learning from experience. Cancer. 2004;101(Suppl 5):1107–17. [PubMed: 15316913]
  38. Michaelson J, Satija S, Moore R, et al. The pattern of breast cancer screening utilization and its consequences. Cancer. 2002;94(1):37–43. [PubMed: 11815958]
  39. Physician Insurers Association of America. Breast Cancer Study. Third Edition. Washington, D.C.: 2002.
  40. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N. Eng. J. Med. 2003;349(23):2191–200. [PubMed: 14657426]
  41. Reynolds J. Putting prevention into practice—the community's role (news) Ann. Int. Med. 1999;130(8):1707–8.
  42. Rockhill G, Byrne C, Rosner B, et al. Breast cancer risk prediction with a log-incidence model: evaluation of accuracy. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2003;56(9):856–61. [PubMed: 14505770]
  43. Saketkhoo DD, Covey AM, Sunshine J, et al. Updated findings from a help wanted index of job advertisements and an analysis of the policy implications: is the job market shortage for diagnostic radiologist stabilizing? Am J. Roentgenol. 2002;179(4):851–8. [PubMed: 12239023]
  44. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J. Chronic Dis. 1967;20(8):637–48. [PubMed: 4860352]
  45. Singletary SE. Rating the risk factors for breast cancer. Ann. Surg. 2003;237(4):474–82. [PMC free article: PMC1514477] [PubMed: 12677142]
  46. Smith-Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL, et al. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United Kingdom. JAMA. 2003;290(16):2129–37. [PubMed: 14570948]
  47. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2003;100(14):8418–23. [PMC free article: PMC166244] [PubMed: 12829800]
  48. Stone EG, Morton SL, Hulscher ME, et al. Interventions that increase use of adult immunization and cancer screening services: a meta-analysis. Ann. Intern. Med. 2002;136(9):641–51. [PubMed: 11992299]
  49. Sumkin JH, Klaman HM, Graham M, et al. Prescreening mammography by technologists: a preliminary assessment. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2003;180(1):253–6. [PubMed: 12490515]
  50. Sunshine JH, Cypel YS, Schepps G. Diagnostic radiologists in 2000: basic characteristics, practices, and issues related to the radiologist shortage. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002;178(2):291–301. [PubMed: 11804882]
  51. Tabar L, Yen MF, Bitak B, et al. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet. 2003;361(9367):1405–10. [PubMed: 12727392]
  52. Taplin SH, Anderman C, Grothaus L, et al. Using physician correspondence and postcard reminders to promote mammography use. Am. J. Public Health. 1994;84(4):571–4. [PMC free article: PMC1614799] [PubMed: 8154558]
  53. Taplin SH, Barlow WE, Ludman E, et al. Testing reminder and motivational telephone calls to increase screening mammography: a randomized study. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2000;92(3):233–42. [PubMed: 10655440]
  54. Taplin SH, Rutler CM, Finder C, et al. Screening mammography: clinical image quality and the risk of interval breast cancer. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2002;178(4):797–803. [PubMed: 11906848]
  55. Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, Buist DS, et al. Evaluating organized breast cancer screening implementation: the prevention of late stage disease? Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13(2):225–34. [PubMed: 14973097]
  56. Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, Ulcickas-Yood M, et al. A reason for late-stage breast cancer: absence of screening or detection, or breakdown in follow-up? J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2004;96(20) [PubMed: 15494602]
  57. Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA. 2003;290(12):1624–32. [PubMed: 14506122]
  58. U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO-02-532) Mammography: Capacity Generally Exists to Deliver Services. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2002.
  59. Wald NJ, Hackstraw AK, Frost CD. When can a risk factor be used as a worthwhile screening test? BMJ. 1999;319(7224):1562–5. [PMC free article: PMC1117271] [PubMed: 10591726]
  60. Welch HG. Should I Be Tested for Cancer? Maybe Not and Here's Why. University of California Press; 2004.
  61. Zheng B, Swensson RG, Golla S, et al. Detection and classification performance levels of mammographic masses under different computer-aided detection cueing environments. Acad. Radiol. 2004;11(4):398–406. [PubMed: 15109012]
Copyright © 2005, National Academy of Sciences.
Bookshelf ID: NBK83869
PubReader format: click here to try

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (3.1M)

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to pubmed

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...