Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 28

1.

Radiologists' interpretive skills in screening vs. diagnostic mammography: are they related?

Elmore JG, Cook AJ, Bogart A, Carney PA, Geller BM, Taplin SH, Buist DS, Onega T, Lee CI, Miglioretti DL.

Clin Imaging. 2016 Nov - Dec;40(6):1096-1103. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2016.06.014.

PMID:
27438069
2.

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.

3.

Using multiscale texture and density features for near-term breast cancer risk analysis.

Sun W, Tseng TL, Qian W, Zhang J, Saltzstein EC, Zheng B, Lure F, Yu H, Zhou S.

Med Phys. 2015 Jun;42(6):2853-62. doi: 10.1118/1.4919772.

4.

Imaging-based screening: maximizing benefits and minimizing harms.

Germino JC, Elmore JG, Carlos RC, Lee CI.

Clin Imaging. 2016 Mar-Apr;40(2):339-43. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2015.06.003. Review.

PMID:
26112898
5.

Shuffling your way out of change blindness.

Josephs E, Drew T, Wolfe J.

Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Feb;23(1):193-200. doi: 10.3758/s13423-015-0886-4.

PMID:
26106062
6.

Predictors of preoperative MRI for breast cancer: differences by data source.

Loggers ET, Gao H, Gold LS, Kessler L, Etzioni R, Buist DS; ADVICE Investigators..

J Comp Eff Res. 2015 May 11:1-12. [Epub ahead of print]

7.

Criteria for identifying radiologists with acceptable screening mammography interpretive performance on basis of multiple performance measures.

Miglioretti DL, Ichikawa L, Smith RA, Bassett LW, Feig SA, Monsees B, Parikh JR, Rosenberg RD, Sickles EA, Carney PA.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015 Apr;204(4):W486-91. doi: 10.2214/AJR.13.12313.

8.

A new quantitative image analysis method for improving breast cancer diagnosis using DCE-MRI examinations.

Yang Q, Li L, Zhang J, Shao G, Zheng B.

Med Phys. 2015 Jan;42(1):103-9. doi: 10.1118/1.4903280.

9.

The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.

Henderson LM, Benefield T, Marsh MW, Schroeder BF, Durham DD, Yankaskas BC, Bowling JM.

Acad Radiol. 2015 Mar;22(3):278-89. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2014.09.013.

10.

Reduction of false-positive recalls using a computerized mammographic image feature analysis scheme.

Tan M, Pu J, Zheng B.

Phys Med Biol. 2014 Aug 7;59(15):4357-73. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/59/15/4357.

11.

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.

12.

Educational interventions to improve screening mammography interpretation: a randomized controlled trial.

Geller BM, Bogart A, Carney PA, Sickles EA, Smith R, Monsees B, Bassett LW, Buist DM, Kerlikowske K, Onega T, Yankaskas BC, Haneuse S, Hill D, Wallis MG, Miglioretti D.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Jun;202(6):W586-96. doi: 10.2214/AJR.13.11147.

13.

Association between computed tissue density asymmetry in bilateral mammograms and near-term breast cancer risk.

Zheng B, Tan M, Ramalingam P, Gur D.

Breast J. 2014 May-Jun;20(3):249-57. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12255.

14.

Prediction of near-term breast cancer risk based on bilateral mammographic feature asymmetry.

Tan M, Zheng B, Ramalingam P, Gur D.

Acad Radiol. 2013 Dec;20(12):1542-50. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2013.08.020.

15.

Feasibility and acceptability of conducting a randomized clinical trial designed to improve interpretation of screening mammography.

Carney PA, Bogart A, Sickles EA, Smith R, Buist DS, Kerlikowske K, Onega T, Miglioretti DL, Rosenberg R, Yankaskas BC, Geller BM.

Acad Radiol. 2013 Nov;20(11):1389-98. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2013.08.017.

16.

Validation of a Medicare Claims-based Algorithm for Identifying Breast Cancers Detected at Screening Mammography.

Fenton JJ, Onega T, Zhu W, Balch S, Smith-Bindman R, Henderson L, Sprague BL, Kerlikowske K, Hubbard RA.

Med Care. 2016 Mar;54(3):e15-22. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182a303d7.

PMID:
23929404
17.

Diagnostic mammography: identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria.

Carney PA, Parikh J, Sickles EA, Feig SA, Monsees B, Bassett LW, Smith RA, Rosenberg R, Ichikawa L, Wallace J, Tran K, Miglioretti DL.

Radiology. 2013 May;267(2):359-67. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12121216.

18.

Sensitivity and specificity of mammographic screening as practised in Vermont and Norway.

Hofvind S, Geller BM, Skelly J, Vacek PM.

Br J Radiol. 2012 Dec;85(1020):e1226-32. doi: 10.1259/bjr/15168178.

19.

Is confidence of mammographic assessment a good predictor of accuracy?

Geller BM, Bogart A, Carney PA, Elmore JG, Monsees BS, Miglioretti DL.

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Jul;199(1):W134-41. doi: 10.2214/AJR.11.7701.

20.

Bilateral mammographic density asymmetry and breast cancer risk: a preliminary assessment.

Zheng B, Sumkin JH, Zuley ML, Wang X, Klym AH, Gur D.

Eur J Radiol. 2012 Nov;81(11):3222-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.04.018.

Items per page

Supplemental Content

Support Center