Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 126

1.

STORM, a new dimension for mammography screening.

Houssami N.

Med J Aust. 2013 Sep 2;199(5):308-9. No abstract available.

PMID:
23992172
3.

Computer aided mammography gets ahead of the evidence.

[No authors listed]

BMJ. 2013 Apr 17;346:f2387. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f2387. No abstract available.

PMID:
23596219
4.

Mammographic computer-aided detection systems.

[No authors listed]

Health Devices. 2003 Apr;32(4):141-64.

PMID:
12760158
5.

Mammography screening is not as good as we hoped.

Jørgensen KJ.

Maturitas. 2010 Jan;65(1):1-2. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2009.10.008. No abstract available.

PMID:
19939593
6.

Breast cancers detected in only one of two arms of a tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) population screening trial (STORM-2).

Bernardi D, Houssami N.

Breast. 2017 Apr;32:98-101. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2017.01.005.

PMID:
28107735
7.

Computer-assisted detection and screening mammography: where's the beef?

Berry DA.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Aug 3;103(15):1139-41. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr267. No abstract available.

PMID:
21795666
8.

The evolving role of new imaging methods in breast screening.

Houssami N, Ciatto S.

Prev Med. 2011 Sep;53(3):123-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.05.003.

PMID:
21605590
9.

Advances in mammographic imaging.

Robson KJ.

Br J Radiol. 2010 Apr;83(988):273-5. doi: 10.1259/bjr/97865299.

10.

Legal Ramifications of Computer-Aided Detection in Mammography.

Mezrich JL, Siegel EL.

J Am Coll Radiol. 2015 Jun;12(6):572-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2014.10.025. No abstract available.

PMID:
25547380
11.

Effectiveness of computer-aided detection in community mammography practice.

Fenton JJ, Abraham L, Taplin SH, Geller BM, Carney PA, D'Orsi C, Elmore JG, Barlow WE; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium..

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Aug 3;103(15):1152-61. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr206.

12.

Sensitivity and specificity of computer-assisted breast cancer detection in mammography screening.

Thurfjell E, Thurfjell MG, Egge E, Bjurstam N.

Acta Radiol. 1998 Jul;39(4):384-8.

PMID:
9685824
13.

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.

14.

Higher mammography screening costs without appreciable clinical benefit: the case of digital mammography.

Kerlikowske K, Hubbard R, Tosteson AN.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Jul 16;106(8). pii: dju191. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju191. No abstract available.

PMID:
25031310
15.

Use of digital breast tomosynthesis with mammography for breast cancer screening or diagnosis.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.; Kaiser Foundation Health Plan.; Southern California Permanente Medical Group..

Technol Eval Cent Assess Program Exec Summ. 2014 Jan;28(6):1-6. No abstract available.

PMID:
24730082
16.

Breast screening using 2D-mammography or integrating digital breast tomosynthesis (3D-mammography) for single-reading or double-reading--evidence to guide future screening strategies.

Houssami N, Macaskill P, Bernardi D, Caumo F, Pellegrini M, Brunelli S, Tuttobene P, Bricolo P, Fantò C, Valentini M, Ciatto S.

Eur J Cancer. 2014 Jul;50(10):1799-807. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.03.017.

17.

Performance parameters for mammography screening.

Ellis RL.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008 Nov;191(5):W204; author reply W205. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.1189. No abstract available.

PMID:
18941056
18.

Computer-aided detection in mammography.

Astley SM, Gilbert FJ.

Clin Radiol. 2004 May;59(5):390-9. Review.

PMID:
15081844
19.
20.

Strategies for digital mammography interpretation in a clinical patient population.

van den Biggelaar FJ, Kessels AG, van Engelshoven JM, Flobbe K.

Int J Cancer. 2009 Dec 15;125(12):2923-9. doi: 10.1002/ijc.24632.

Supplemental Content

Support Center