Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Search results

Items: 1 to 20 of 45

1.

Total cost-effectiveness of mammography screening strategies.

Mittmann N, Stout NK, Lee P, Tosteson AN, Trentham-Dietz A, Alagoz O, Yaffe MJ.

Health Rep. 2015 Dec;26(12):16-25.

2.

Clinical outcomes of modelling mammography screening strategies.

Yaffe MJ, Mittmann N, Lee P, Tosteson AN, Trentham-Dietz A, Alagoz O, Stout NK.

Health Rep. 2015 Dec;26(12):9-15.

3.
4.

Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts.

Parker L, Rychetnik L, Carter S.

BMJ Open. 2015 May 20;5(5):e006333. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006333.

5.

Sustaining mammography screening among the medically underserved: a follow-up evaluation.

Davis TC, Arnold CL, Bennett CL, Wolf MS, Liu D, Rademaker A.

J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2015 Apr;24(4):291-8. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2014.4967.

6.

Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts.

Sprague BL, Stout NK, Schechter C, van Ravesteyn NT, Cevik M, Alagoz O, Lee CI, van den Broek JJ, Miglioretti DL, Mandelblatt JS, de Koning HJ, Kerlikowske K, Lehman CD, Tosteson AN.

Ann Intern Med. 2015 Feb 3;162(3):157-66. doi: 10.7326/M14-0692.

7.

Cost-effectiveness of population screening for BRCA mutations in Ashkenazi jewish women compared with family history-based testing.

Manchanda R, Legood R, Burnell M, McGuire A, Raikou M, Loggenberg K, Wardle J, Sanderson S, Gessler S, Side L, Balogun N, Desai R, Kumar A, Dorkins H, Wallis Y, Chapman C, Taylor R, Jacobs C, Tomlinson I, Beller U, Menon U, Jacobs I.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Nov 30;107(1):380. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju380.

8.

Comparative effectiveness of combined digital mammography and tomosynthesis screening for women with dense breasts.

Lee CI, Cevik M, Alagoz O, Sprague BL, Tosteson AN, Miglioretti DL, Kerlikowske K, Stout NK, Jarvik JG, Ramsey SD, Lehman CD.

Radiology. 2015 Mar;274(3):772-80. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14141237.

9.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies for integrating MRI into breast cancer screening for women at high risk.

Ahern CH, Shih YC, Dong W, Parmigiani G, Shen Y.

Br J Cancer. 2014 Oct 14;111(8):1542-51. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.458.

10.

Evolution of breast cancer screening in the Medicare population: clinical and economic implications.

Killelea BK, Long JB, Chagpar AB, Ma X, Wang R, Ross JS, Gross CP.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Jul 16;106(8). pii: dju159. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju159.

11.

Perceived barriers to mammography among underserved women in a Breast Health Center Outreach Program.

Fayanju OM, Kraenzle S, Drake BF, Oka M, Goodman MS.

Am J Surg. 2014 Sep;208(3):425-34. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.03.005.

12.

Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography.

Stout NK, Lee SJ, Schechter CB, Kerlikowske K, Alagoz O, Berry D, Buist DS, Cevik M, Chisholm G, de Koning HJ, Huang H, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, Munsell MF, Trentham-Dietz A, van Ravesteyn NT, Tosteson AN, Mandelblatt JS.

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 May 28;106(6):dju092. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju092.

13.

Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer control strategies in Central America: the cases of Costa Rica and Mexico.

Niëns LM, Zelle SG, Gutiérrez-Delgado C, Rivera Peña G, Hidalgo Balarezo BR, Rodriguez Steller E, Rutten FF.

PLoS One. 2014 Apr 25;9(4):e95836. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095836.

14.

Aggregate cost of mammography screening in the United States: comparison of current practice and advocated guidelines.

O'Donoghue C, Eklund M, Ozanne EM, Esserman LJ.

Ann Intern Med. 2014 Feb 4;160(3):145. doi: 10.7326/M13-1217.

15.

Cost-effectiveness of MRI for breast cancer screening in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Pataky R, Armstrong L, Chia S, Coldman AJ, Kim-Sing C, McGillivray B, Scott J, Wilson CM, Peacock S.

BMC Cancer. 2013 Jul 10;13:339. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-339.

16.

Cost effectiveness of the NHS breast screening programme: life table model.

Pharoah PD, Sewell B, Fitzsimmons D, Bennett HS, Pashayan N.

BMJ. 2013 May 9;346:f2618. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f2618. Erratum in: BMJ. 2013;346:f3822.

17.

Which screening strategy should be offered to women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations? A simulation of comparative cost-effectiveness.

de Bock GH, Vermeulen KM, Jansen L, Oosterwijk JC, Siesling S, Dorrius MD, Feenstra T, Houssami N, Greuter MJ.

Br J Cancer. 2013 Apr 30;108(8):1579-86. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.149.

18.

Cost-effectiveness of alternating magnetic resonance imaging and digital mammography screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers.

Cott Chubiz JE, Lee JM, Gilmore ME, Kong CY, Lowry KP, Halpern EF, McMahon PM, Ryan PD, Gazelle GS.

Cancer. 2013 Mar 15;119(6):1266-76. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27864.

19.

Cost-effectiveness of a tailored intervention designed to increase breast cancer screening among a non-adherent population: a randomized controlled trial.

Ishikawa Y, Hirai K, Saito H, Fukuyoshi J, Yonekura A, Harada K, Seki A, Shibuya D, Nakamura Y.

BMC Public Health. 2012 Sep 11;12:760. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-760.

20.

Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness.

Schousboe JT, Kerlikowske K, Loh A, Cummings SR.

Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jul 5;155(1):10-20. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-155-1-201107050-00003.

Items per page

Supplemental Content

Loading ...
Support Center