Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 127

1.

Full-field digital mammography compared to screen film mammography in the prevalent round of a population-based screening programme: the Vestfold County Study.

Vigeland E, Klaasen H, Klingen TA, Hofvind S, Skaane P.

Eur Radiol. 2008 Jan;18(1):183-91. Epub 2007 Aug 7.

PMID:
17680246
3.

Follow-up and final results of the Oslo I Study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading.

Skaane P, Skjennald A, Young K, Egge E, Jebsen I, Sager EM, Scheel B, Søvik E, Ertzaas AK, Hofvind S, Abdelnoor M.

Acta Radiol. 2005 Nov;46(7):679-89.

PMID:
16372686
4.

Mammographic performance in a population-based screening program: before, during, and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital mammography.

Hofvind S, Skaane P, Elmore JG, Sebuødegård S, Hoff SR, Lee CI.

Radiology. 2014 Jul;272(1):52-62. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14131502. Epub 2014 Apr 1.

6.

Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography in a population-based screening program: The Sogn and Fjordane study.

Juel IM, Skaane P, Hoff SR, Johannessen G, Hofvind S.

Acta Radiol. 2010 Nov;51(9):962-8. doi: 10.3109/02841851.2010.504969.

PMID:
20942729
7.

Screening outcome and surgical treatment during and after the transition from screen-film to digital screening mammography in the south of The Netherlands.

Weber RJ, Nederend J, Voogd AC, Strobbe LJ, Duijm LE.

Int J Cancer. 2015 Jul 1;137(1):135-43. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29354. Epub 2014 Dec 10.

8.

Digital vs screen-film mammography in population-based breast cancer screening: performance indicators and tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers.

de Munck L, de Bock GH, Otter R, Reiding D, Broeders MJ, Willemse PH, Siesling S.

Br J Cancer. 2016 Aug 23;115(5):517-24. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2016.226. Epub 2016 Aug 4.

PMID:
27490807
9.

Breast cancer: missed interval and screening-detected cancer at full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography-- results from a retrospective review.

Hoff SR, Abrahamsen AL, Samset JH, Vigeland E, Klepp O, Hofvind S.

Radiology. 2012 Aug;264(2):378-86. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12112074. Epub 2012 Jun 14. Erratum in: Radiology. 2013 Jan;266(1):367.

PMID:
22700555
10.

Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program.

Karssemeijer N, Bluekens AM, Beijerinck D, Deurenberg JJ, Beekman M, Visser R, van Engen R, Bartels-Kortland A, Broeders MJ.

Radiology. 2009 Nov;253(2):353-8. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2532090225. Epub 2009 Jul 31.

PMID:
19703851
11.

Screening outcome in women repeatedly recalled for the same mammographic abnormality before, during and after the transition from screen-film to full-field digital screening mammography.

van Bommel R, Voogd AC, Louwman MW, Strobbe LJ, Venderink D, Duijm LE.

Eur Radiol. 2017 Feb;27(2):553-561. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4399-y. Epub 2016 May 14.

PMID:
27180183
12.

Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations.

Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D'Orsi CJ, Isaacs PK, Moss LJ, Karellas A, Sisney GA, Kuni CC, Cutter GR.

Radiology. 2001 Mar;218(3):873-80.

PMID:
11230669
13.

Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparison within the UK breast screening program and systematic review of published data.

Vinnicombe S, Pinto Pereira SM, McCormack VA, Shiel S, Perry N, Dos Santos Silva IM.

Radiology. 2009 May;251(2):347-58. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2512081235. Review.

PMID:
19401569
14.

Digital mammography in a screening programme and its implications for pathology: a comparative study.

Feeley L, Kiernan D, Mooney T, Flanagan F, Hargaden G, Kell M, Stokes M, Kennedy M.

J Clin Pathol. 2011 Mar;64(3):215-9. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2010.085860. Epub 2010 Dec 22.

PMID:
21177749
15.

Impact of the transition from screen-film to digital screening mammography on interval cancer characteristics and treatment - a population based study from the Netherlands.

Nederend J, Duijm LE, Louwman MW, Coebergh JW, Roumen RM, Lohle PN, Roukema JA, Rutten MJ, van Steenbergen LN, Ernst MF, Jansen FH, Plaisier ML, Hooijen MJ, Voogd AC.

Eur J Cancer. 2014 Jan;50(1):31-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.09.018. Epub 2013 Oct 25.

PMID:
24275518
16.

Nation-wide data on screening performance during the transition to digital mammography: observations in 6 million screens.

van Luijt PA, Fracheboud J, Heijnsdijk EA, den Heeten GJ, de Koning HJ; National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening in Netherlands Study Group (NETB).

Eur J Cancer. 2013 Nov;49(16):3517-25. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.06.020. Epub 2013 Jul 17.

17.

The impact of digital mammography on screening a young cohort of women for breast cancer in an urban specialist breast unit.

Perry NM, Patani N, Milner SE, Pinker K, Mokbel K, Allgood PC, Duffy SW.

Eur Radiol. 2011 Apr;21(4):676-82. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1968-3. Epub 2010 Oct 1.

PMID:
20886340
18.

Impact of transition from analog screening mammography to digital screening mammography on screening outcome in The Netherlands: a population-based study.

Nederend J, Duijm LE, Louwman MW, Groenewoud JH, Donkers-van Rossum AB, Voogd AC.

Ann Oncol. 2012 Dec;23(12):3098-103. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mds146. Epub 2012 Jun 27.

PMID:
22745215
19.

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
20.

Conspicuity of breast cancer according to histopathological type and breast density when imaged by full-field digital mammography compared with screen-film mammography.

Pinker K, Perry N, Vinnicombe S, Shiel S, Weber M.

Eur Radiol. 2011 Jan;21(1):18-25. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1906-4. Epub 2010 Aug 4.

PMID:
20683600

Supplemental Content

Support Center