Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 608

1.

Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.

Smith-Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL, Sickles EA, Blanks R, Ballard-Barbash R, Bobo JK, Lee NC, Wallis MG, Patnick J, Kerlikowske K.

JAMA. 2003 Oct 22;290(16):2129-37. Erratum in: JAMA. 2004 Feb 18;291(7):824.

PMID:
14570948
2.

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
3.

Clinical outcomes of mammography in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 2009-2012.

White A, Miller J, Royalty J, Ryerson AB, Benard V, Helsel W, Kammerer W.

Cancer Causes Control. 2015 May;26(5):723-32. doi: 10.1007/s10552-015-0567-7. Epub 2015 Mar 26.

4.
5.

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
6.

Screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer: an evidence-based analysis.

Health Quality Ontario.

Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2007;7(1):1-32. Epub 2007 Jan 1.

7.

Breast cancer screening among low-income or uninsured women: results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, July 1995 to March 2002 (United States).

Eheman CR, Benard VB, Blackman D, Lawson HW, Anderson C, Helsel W, Lee NC.

Cancer Causes Control. 2006 Feb;17(1):29-38.

PMID:
16411050
8.

Cervical cancer screening of underserved women in the United States: results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 1997-2012.

Tangka FK, Howard DH, Royalty J, Dalzell LP, Miller J, O'Hara BJ, Sabatino SA, Joseph K, Kenney K, Guy GP Jr, Hall IJ.

Cancer Causes Control. 2015 May;26(5):671-86. doi: 10.1007/s10552-015-0524-5. Epub 2015 Mar 18. Erratum in: Cancer Causes Control. 2015 May;26(5):687.

9.

Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography.

Ernster VL, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE, Zheng Y, Weaver DL, Cutter G, Yankaskas BC, Rosenberg R, Carney PA, Kerlikowske K, Taplin SH, Urban N, Geller BM.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Oct 16;94(20):1546-54.

PMID:
12381707
10.

Implementing recommendations for the early detection of breast and cervical cancer among low-income women.

Lawson HW, Henson R, Bobo JK, Kaeser MK.

MMWR Recomm Rep. 2000 Mar 31;49(RR-2):37-55.

11.

Factors associated with imaging and procedural events used to detect breast cancer after screening mammography.

Carney PA, Abraham LA, Miglioretti DL, Yabroff KR, Sickles EA, Buist DS, Kasales CJ, Geller BM, Rosenberg RD, Dignan MB, Weaver DL, Kerlikowske K; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Feb;188(2):385-92.

PMID:
17242246
12.

Performance of first mammography examination in women younger than 40 years.

Yankaskas BC, Haneuse S, Kapp JM, Kerlikowske K, Geller B, Buist DS; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010 May 19;102(10):692-701. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq090. Epub 2010 May 3.

13.

Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.

Kemp Jacobsen K, O'Meara ES, Key D, S M Buist D, Kerlikowske K, Vejborg I, Sprague BL, Lynge E, von Euler-Chelpin M.

Int J Cancer. 2015 Nov 1;137(9):2198-207. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29593. Epub 2015 Jun 1.

14.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection.

Lehman CD, Wellman RD, Buist DS, Kerlikowske K, Tosteson AN, Miglioretti DL; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

JAMA Intern Med. 2015 Nov;175(11):1828-37. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.5231.

15.

Evaluation of mammographic surveillance services in women aged 40-49 years with a moderate family history of breast cancer: a single-arm cohort study.

Duffy SW, Mackay J, Thomas S, Anderson E, Chen TH, Ellis I, Evans G, Fielder H, Fox R, Gui G, Macmillan D, Moss S, Rogers C, Sibbering M, Wallis M, Warren R, Watson E, Whynes D, Allgood P, Caunt J.

Health Technol Assess. 2013 Mar;17(11):vii-xiv, 1-95. doi: 10.3310/hta17110.

16.

Factors Associated With Rates of False-Positive and False-Negative Results From Digital Mammography Screening: An Analysis of Registry Data.

Nelson HD, O'Meara ES, Kerlikowske K, Balch S, Miglioretti D.

Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 16;164(4):226-35. doi: 10.7326/M15-0971. Epub 2016 Jan 12.

18.

Improving screening recall services for women with false-positive mammograms: a comparison of qualitative evidence with UK guidelines.

Bond M, Garside R, Hyde C.

BMJ Open. 2015 Jan 23;5(1):e005855. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005855.

19.

Predictors of outcome of mammography in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme.

Banks E, Reeves G, Beral V, Bull D, Crossley B, Simmonds M, Hilton E, Bailey S, Barrett N, Briers P, English R, Jackson A, Kutt E, Lavelle J, Rockall L, Wallis MG, Wilson M.

J Med Screen. 2002;9(2):74-82.

PMID:
12133927
20.

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

Supplemental Content

Support Center