Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 136

Similar articles for PubMed (Select 11517044)

1.

Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography.

Yankaskas BC, Cleveland RJ, Schell MJ, Kozar R.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Sep;177(3):543-9.

PMID:
11517044
3.
4.

Performance of screening mammography among women with and without a first-degree relative with breast cancer.

Kerlikowske K, Carney PA, Geller B, Mandelson MT, Taplin SH, Malvin K, Ernster V, Urban N, Cutter G, Rosenberg R, Ballard-Barbash R.

Ann Intern Med. 2000 Dec 5;133(11):855-63.

PMID:
11103055
5.

Evidence-based target recall rates for screening mammography.

Schell MJ, Yankaskas BC, Ballard-Barbash R, Qaqish BF, Barlow WE, Rosenberg RD, Smith-Bindman R.

Radiology. 2007 Jun;243(3):681-9.

PMID:
17517927
6.

Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators.

Otten JD, Karssemeijer N, Hendriks JH, Groenewoud JH, Fracheboud J, Verbeek AL, de Koning HJ, Holland R.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 May 18;97(10):748-54.

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.

PMID:
17114541
8.

Effect of previous benign breast biopsy on the interpretive performance of subsequent screening mammography.

Taplin SH, Abraham L, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Buist DS, Smith-Bindman R, Lehman C, Weaver D, Carney PA, Barlow WE.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 Jul 21;102(14):1040-51. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq233. Epub 2010 Jul 2.

9.

Effect of radiologists' diagnostic work-up volume on interpretive performance.

Buist DS, Anderson ML, Smith RA, Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Monsees BS, Sickles EA, Taplin SH, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Onega TL.

Radiology. 2014 Nov;273(2):351-64. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132806. Epub 2014 Jun 24.

PMID:
24960110
10.

Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program.

Hambly NM, McNicholas MM, Phelan N, Hargaden GC, O'Doherty A, Flanagan FL.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Oct;193(4):1010-8. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.2157.

PMID:
19770323
11.

Reassessment of breast cancers missed during routine screening mammography: a community-based study.

Yankaskas BC, Schell MJ, Bird RE, Desrochers DA.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Sep;177(3):535-41.

PMID:
11517043
12.

Comparison of woman-specific versus breast-specific data for reporting screening mammography performance.

Heinzen MT, Yankaskas BC, Kwok RK.

Acad Radiol. 2000 Apr;7(4):232-6.

PMID:
10766095
13.

International comparison of performance measures for screening mammography: can it be done?

Yankaskas BC, Klabunde CN, Ancelle-Park R, Renner G, Wang H, Fracheboud J, Pou G, Bulliard JL; International Breast Cancer Screening Network.

J Med Screen. 2004;11(4):187-93.

PMID:
15624239
14.
15.

Effect of observing change from comparison mammograms on performance of screening mammography in a large community-based population.

Yankaskas BC, May RC, Matuszewski J, Bowling JM, Jarman MP, Schroeder BF.

Radiology. 2011 Dec;261(3):762-70. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11110653. Epub 2011 Oct 26.

16.

Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK.

Smith-Bindman R, Ballard-Barbash R, Miglioretti DL, Patnick J, Kerlikowske K.

J Med Screen. 2005;12(1):50-4.

PMID:
15814020
17.

Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists' characteristics associated with accuracy.

Elmore JG, Jackson SL, Abraham L, Miglioretti DL, Carney PA, Geller BM, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Onega T, Rosenberg RD, Sickles EA, Buist DS.

Radiology. 2009 Dec;253(3):641-51. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2533082308. Epub 2009 Oct 28.

18.

Influence of annual interpretive volume on screening mammography performance in the United States.

Buist DS, Anderson ML, Haneuse SJ, Sickles EA, Smith RA, Carney PA, Taplin SH, Rosenberg RD, Geller BM, Onega TL, Monsees BS, Bassett LW, Yankaskas BC, Elmore JG, Kerlikowske K, Miglioretti DL.

Radiology. 2011 Apr;259(1):72-84. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10101698. Epub 2011 Feb 22.

19.

The New Mexico Mammography Project. Screening mammography performance in Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1991 to 1993.

Rosenberg RD, Lando JF, Hunt WC, Darling RR, Williamson MR, Linver MN, Gilliland FD, Key CR.

Cancer. 1996 Oct 15;78(8):1731-9.

PMID:
8859186
20.

Comparison of computer-aided detection to double reading of screening mammograms: review of 231,221 mammograms.

Gromet M.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Apr;190(4):854-9. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.2812.

PMID:
18356428
Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk