Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 230

1.

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 6;94(5):369-75.

PMID:
11880475
2.

Does practice make perfect when interpreting mammography?

Elmore JG, Carney PA.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Mar 6;94(5):321-3. No abstract available.

PMID:
11880465
3.

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.

4.

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.

5.

Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation.

Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003 Feb 19;95(4):282-90.

PMID:
12591984
6.

Radiographers supporting radiologists in the interpretation of screening mammography: a viable strategy to meet the shortage in the number of radiologists.

Torres-Mejía G, Smith RA, Carranza-Flores Mde L, Bogart A, Martínez-Matsushita L, Miglioretti DL, Kerlikowske K, Ortega-Olvera C, Montemayor-Varela E, Angeles-Llerenas A, Bautista-Arredondo S, Sánchez-González G, Martínez-Montañez OG, Uscanga-Sánchez SR, Lazcano-Ponce E, Hernández-Ávila M.

BMC Cancer. 2015 May 16;15:410. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1399-2.

7.

Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists.

Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA, Taplin SH, D'Orsi C, Cutter G, Hendrick RE, Elmore JG.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004 Dec 15;96(24):1840-50.

8.

Mammographic interpretive volume and diagnostic mammogram interpretation performance in community practice.

Haneuse S, Buist DS, Miglioretti DL, Anderson ML, Carney PA, Onega T, Geller BM, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Elmore JG, Taplin SH, Smith RA, Sickles EA.

Radiology. 2012 Jan;262(1):69-79. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11111026. Epub 2011 Nov 21.

9.

Does litigation influence medical practice? The influence of community radiologists' medical malpractice perceptions and experience on screening mammography.

Elmore JG, Taplin SH, Barlow WE, Cutter GR, D'Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, Abraham LA, Fosse JS, Carney PA.

Radiology. 2005 Jul;236(1):37-46.

10.

Patient and Radiologist Characteristics Associated With Accuracy of Two Types of Diagnostic Mammograms.

Jackson SL, Abraham L, Miglioretti DL, Buist DS, Kerlikowske K, Onega T, Carney PA, Sickles EA, Elmore JG.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Aug;205(2):456-63. doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13672.

11.

Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities.

Jackson SL, Taplin SH, Sickles EA, Abraham L, Barlow WE, Carney PA, Geller B, Berns EA, Cutter GR, Elmore JG.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Jun 3;101(11):814-27. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp105. Epub 2009 May 26.

12.

Does Reader Performance with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Vary according to Experience with Two-dimensional Mammography?

Tucker L, Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, Dibden A, Seth A, Morel J, Bundred S, Litherland J, Klassen H, Lip G, Purushothaman H, Dobson HM, McClure L, Skippage P, Stoner K, Kissin C, Beetles U, Lim YY, Hurley E, Goligher J, Rahim R, Gagliardi TJ, Suaris T, Duffy SW.

Radiology. 2017 May;283(2):371-380. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017151936. Epub 2017 Mar 13.

PMID:
28287917
13.

Performance assessment for radiologists interpreting screening mammography.

Woodard DB, Gelfand AE, Barlow WE, Elmore JG.

Stat Med. 2007 Mar 30;26(7):1532-51.

14.

Time trends in radiologists' interpretive performance at screening mammography from the community-based Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, 1996-2004.

Ichikawa LE, Barlow WE, Anderson ML, Taplin SH, Geller BM, Brenner RJ; National Cancer Institute-sponsored Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Radiology. 2010 Jul;256(1):74-82. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10091881. Epub 2010 May 26.

15.

Recall and detection rates in screening mammography.

Gur D, Sumkin JH, Hardesty LA, Clearfield RJ, Cohen CS, Ganott MA, Hakim CM, Harris KM, Poller WR, Shah R, Wallace LP, Rockette HE.

Cancer. 2004 Apr 15;100(8):1590-4.

16.

Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography.

Miglioretti DL, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham L, Brenner RJ, Carney PA, Bowles EJ, Buist DS, Elmore JG.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Dec 19;99(24):1854-63. Epub 2007 Dec 11.

17.

Radiologist interpretive volume and breast cancer screening accuracy in a Canadian organized screening program.

Théberge I, Chang SL, Vandal N, Daigle JM, Guertin MH, Pelletier E, Brisson J.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Mar;106(3):djt461. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djt461. Epub 2014 Mar 5.

PMID:
24598715
18.

Radiologists' performance and their enjoyment of interpreting screening mammograms.

Geller BM, Bowles EJ, Sohng HY, Brenner RJ, Miglioretti DL, Carney PA, Elmore JG.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Feb;192(2):361-9. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.1647.

19.

Optimal screening mammography reading volumes; evidence from real life in the East Midlands region of the NHS Breast Screening Programme.

Cornford E, Reed J, Murphy A, Bennett R, Evans A.

Clin Radiol. 2011 Feb;66(2):103-7. doi: 10.1016/j.crad.2010.09.014. Epub 2010 Dec 3.

PMID:
21216324
20.

Breast screening: PERFORMS identifies key mammographic training needs.

Scott HJ, Gale AG.

Br J Radiol. 2006 Dec;79 Spec No 2:S127-33.

PMID:
17209118

Supplemental Content

Support Center