Published in Decis Anal on September 01, 2013
Magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) in cancer: Technique, analysis, and applications. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc (2015) 0.77
Added Value of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound on Biopsies of Focal Hepatic Lesions Invisible on Fusion Imaging Guidance. Korean J Radiol (2017) 0.75
Changing Cycle Lengths in State-Transition Models: Challenges and Solutions. Med Decis Making (2016) 0.75
Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin (2007) 53.49
Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med (2009) 21.55
Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst (1989) 19.87
Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med (2005) 16.70
Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases. Radiology (1991) 4.84
Gains in life expectancy from medical interventions--standardizing data on outcomes. N Engl J Med (1998) 4.47
Young age at diagnosis correlates with worse prognosis and defines a subset of breast cancers with shared patterns of gene expression. J Clin Oncol (2008) 4.45
Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst (2004) 4.07
Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Findings from a national sample. Arch Intern Med (1996) 3.45
Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography. Radiology (2005) 3.40
Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography. Ann Fam Med (2013) 3.24
Screening mammography for women 40 to 49 years of age: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med (2007) 3.14
Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. J Natl Cancer Inst (1998) 3.08
Frequency and predictive value of a mammographic recommendation for short-interval follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst (2003) 2.64
Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol (2000) 2.44
Probably benign breast lesions: when should follow-up be recommended and what is the optimal follow-up protocol? Radiology (1999) 2.20
United States life tables, 2003. Natl Vital Stat Rep (2006) 2.15
BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Radiology (1999) 2.14
The positive predictive value of mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol (1992) 2.08
Decreasing women's anxieties after abnormal mammograms: a controlled trial. J Natl Cancer Inst (2004) 1.90
Nonpalpable, probably benign lesions: role of follow-up mammography. Radiology (1992) 1.79
Nonpalpable breast lesions: recommendations for biopsy based on suspicion of carcinoma at mammography. Radiology (1988) 1.69
Probabilistic computer model developed from clinical data in national mammography database format to classify mammographic findings. Radiology (2009) 1.65
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
Bayesian network to predict breast cancer risk of mammographic microcalcifications and reduce number of benign biopsy results: initial experience. Radiology (2006) 1.49
Short-interval follow-up mammography: are we doing the right thing? J Natl Cancer Inst (2003) 1.49
Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol (2002) 1.45
Breast cancer: prediction with artificial neural network based on BI-RADS standardized lexicon. Radiology (1995) 1.43
Breast screening: adverse psychological consequences one month after placing women on early recall because of a diagnostic uncertainty. A multicentre study. J Med Screen (1997) 1.40
Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography. Radiology (2001) 1.35
Optimal Breast Biopsy Decision-Making Based on Mammographic Features and Demographic Factors. Oper Res (2010) 1.34
Breast cancer risk estimation with artificial neural networks revisited: discrimination and calibration. Cancer (2010) 1.26
Potential of computer-aided diagnosis to reduce variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms depicting microcalcifications. Radiology (2001) 1.18
Optimized approach to decision fusion of heterogeneous data for breast cancer diagnosis. Med Phys (2006) 1.18
A logistic regression model based on the national mammography database format to aid breast cancer diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol (2009) 1.11
BI-RADS data should not be used to estimate ROC curves. Radiology (2010) 1.06
Six-month follow-up: an alternative view. Radiology (1999) 1.03
Induced costs of low-cost screening mammography. Radiology (1988) 1.02
Use of BI-RADS 3-probably benign category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial. Radiology (2011) 0.95
What is the optimal threshold at which to recommend breast biopsy? PLoS One (2012) 0.94
The American College of Radiology's BI-RADS 3 Classification in a Nationwide Screening Program: current assessment and comparison with earlier use. Breast J (2004) 0.89
Life expectancy as a measurement of the benefit shown by clinical trials of treatment for early breast cancer. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) (1998) 0.85
Immediate biopsy versus observation for abnormal findings on mammograms: an analysis of potential outcomes and costs. Am J Surg (1995) 0.80