PubRank

Edward A Sickles

Author PubWeight™ 103.48‹?›

Top papers

Rank Title Journal Year PubWeight™‹?›
1 Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med 2007 8.58
2 Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom. JAMA 2003 4.53
3 Performance benchmarks for screening mammography. Radiology 2006 4.41
4 Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2011 4.31
5 Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003 3.41
6 Variability in interpretive performance at screening mammography and radiologists' characteristics associated with accuracy. Radiology 2009 2.88
7 When radiologists perform best: the learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation. Radiology 2009 2.78
8 Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005 2.72
9 The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history. J Am Coll Radiol 2009 2.68
10 Concordance of breast imaging reporting and data system assessments and management recommendations in screening mammography. Radiology 2002 2.36
11 The California breast density information group: a collaborative response to the issues of breast density, breast cancer risk, and breast density notification legislation. Radiology 2013 2.27
12 To seek perfection or not? That is the question. Radiology 2012 2.15
13 Benefit of semiannual ipsilateral mammographic surveillance following breast conservation therapy. Radiology 2012 2.07
14 Identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria for screening mammography. Radiology 2010 2.06
15 Influence of annual interpretive volume on screening mammography performance in the United States. Radiology 2011 1.81
16 Breast cancer yield for screening mammographic examinations with recommendation for short-interval follow-up. Radiology 2005 1.75
17 Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008 1.61
18 Analysis of 172 subtle findings on prior normal mammograms in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening. Radiology 2003 1.55
19 Use of the American College of Radiology BI-RADS to report on the mammographic evaluation of women with signs and symptoms of breast disease. Radiology 2002 1.53
20 Recommendation for short-interval follow-up examinations after a probably benign assessment: is clinical practice consistent with BI-RADS guidance? AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010 1.49
21 Short-interval follow-up mammography: are we doing the right thing? J Natl Cancer Inst 2003 1.49
22 The ACR/Society of Breast Imaging Resident and Fellowship Training Curriculum for Breast Imaging, updated. J Am Coll Radiol 2012 1.40
23 Diagnosis of second breast cancer events after initial diagnosis of early stage breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010 1.29
24 The place of medical image perception in 21st-century health care. J Am Coll Radiol 2006 1.21
25 Re: Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004 1.20
26 Reality check: perceived versus actual performance of community mammographers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006 1.20
27 Probably benign breast masses at US: is follow-up an acceptable alternative to biopsy? Radiology 2007 1.18
28 Variability of interpretive accuracy among diagnostic mammography facilities. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009 1.17
29 Accuracy and outcomes of screening mammography in women with a personal history of early-stage breast cancer. JAMA 2011 1.15
30 Positive predictive value of specific mammographic findings according to reader and patient variables. Radiology 2009 1.15
31 Improving the concordance of mammography assessment and management recommendations. Radiology 2006 1.15
32 Density and breast cancer risk. Radiology 2013 1.12
33 Follow-up of palpable circumscribed noncalcified solid breast masses at mammography and US: can biopsy be averted? Radiology 2004 1.09
34 Differential value of comparison with previous examinations in diagnostic versus screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002 1.09
35 Factors affecting radiologist inconsistency in screening mammography. Acad Radiol 2002 1.07
36 Radiologist agreement for mammographic recall by case difficulty and finding type. J Am Coll Radiol 2012 1.01
37 Interpreting data from audits when screening and diagnostic mammography outcomes are combined. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002 1.01
38 Reactions to uncertainty and the accuracy of diagnostic mammography. J Gen Intern Med 2007 1.00
39 A probabilistic expert system that provides automated mammographic-histologic correlation: initial experience. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004 1.00
40 Decreased accuracy in interpretation of community-based screening mammography for women with multiple clinical risk factors. J Clin Epidemiol 2009 0.97
41 Effect of radiologists' diagnostic work-up volume on interpretive performance. Radiology 2014 0.96
42 Radiologists' attitudes and use of mammography audit reports. Acad Radiol 2010 0.96
43 Accuracy of short-interval follow-up mammograms by patient and radiologist characteristics. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008 0.95
44 Mammographic interpretive volume and diagnostic mammogram interpretation performance in community practice. Radiology 2011 0.93
45 Correlation of radiologist rank as a measure of skill in screening and diagnostic interpretation of mammograms. Radiology 2006 0.93
46 Factors associated with imaging and procedural events used to detect breast cancer after screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007 0.92
47 Evaluation of proscriptive health care policy implementation in screening mammography. Radiology 2003 0.90
48 Computer-aided detection output on 172 subtle findings on normal mammograms previously obtained in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening mammography. Radiology 2004 0.90
49 Diagnostic mammography: identifying minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria. Radiology 2013 0.89
50 Stereoscopic digital mammography: improved specificity and reduced rate of recall in a prospective clinical trial. Radiology 2012 0.89
51 Developing asymmetry identified on mammography: correlation with imaging outcome and pathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007 0.86
52 Establishing a gold standard for test sets: variation in interpretive agreement of expert mammographers. Acad Radiol 2013 0.85
53 Educational interventions to improve screening mammography interpretation: a randomized controlled trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014 0.85
54 Feasibility and satisfaction with a tailored web-based audit intervention for recalibrating radiologists' thresholds for conducting additional work-up. Acad Radiol 2010 0.85
55 Using a tailored web-based intervention to set goals to reduce unnecessary recall. Acad Radiol 2011 0.84
56 The evolution of breast imaging: past to present. Radiology 2014 0.83
57 Impact of an educational intervention designed to reduce unnecessary recall during screening mammography. Acad Radiol 2012 0.82
58 The probably benign assessment. Radiol Clin North Am 2007 0.82
59 Mammography with breast cushions. Womens Health Issues 2005 0.81
60 Feasibility and acceptability of conducting a randomized clinical trial designed to improve interpretation of screening mammography. Acad Radiol 2013 0.79
61 Limitations of minimally acceptable interpretive performance criteria for screening mammography. Radiology 2011 0.78
62 Large rodlike calcifications at mammography: analysis of morphologic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013 0.78
63 The developing asymmetry: revisiting a perceptual and diagnostic challenge. Radiology 2015 0.77
64 Response. Radiology 2013 0.75
65 Predicting invasive breast cancer versus DCIS in different age groups. BMC Cancer 2014 0.75
66 Response. Radiology 2014 0.75
67 Response. Radiology 2013 0.75
68 Criteria for identifying radiologists with acceptable screening mammography interpretive performance on basis of multiple performance measures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015 0.75
69 Radiologists' perceptions of computer aided detection versus double reading for mammography interpretation. Acad Radiol 2010 0.75
70 The impact of obesity on follow-up after an abnormal screening mammogram. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011 0.75
71 Response. Radiology 2013 0.75
72 Solitary dilated duct identified at mammography: outcomes analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010 0.75
73 Preoperative embolization of vascular phyllodes tumor of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005 0.75