Comparison of 2 different invitation methods for mammography screening
Lamberini, M.P.; Borsini, P.F.; Lucarelli, C.; Austeri, C.; Marcucci, F.; Corsetti, C.; Bonfrisco, L.; Ciatto, S.; Livolsi, L.
La Radiologia Medica 106(4): 420
2003
ISSN/ISBN: 0033-8362 PMID: 14669765 Document Number: 554834
Document emailed within 1 workday
Related Documents
Gram, I.T.; Lund-Larsen, P.G.; Rosenlund, A.F.; Størmer, J. 1989: Mammography screening in Tromsö. Realization and results of the first mammography screening in Norway Tidsskrift for den Norske Laegeforening: Tidsskrift for Praktisk Medicin Ny Raekke 109(10): 1040-1042Luczyńska, E.; Heinze, S.; Adamczyk, A.; Rys, J.; Mitus, J.W.; Hendrick, E. 2016: Comparison of the Mammography, Contrast-Enhanced Spectral Mammography and Ultrasonography in a Group of 116 patients Anticancer Research 36(8): 4359-4366
Ngo, Ořej.; Chloupková, R.; Ambrožová, M.; Suchánek, Štěpán.; Zavoral, M.; Seifert, B.; Dvořák, Vír.; Daneš, J.; Skovajsová, M.; Dušek, L.; Májek, Ořej. 2019: Evaluation of the personalized invitation of Czech citizens to screening programs Casopis Lekaru Ceskych 158(3-4): 147-150
Jean, S.; Major, D.; Rochette, L.; Brisson, J. 2005: Screening mammography participation and invitational strategy: the Quebec Breast Cancer Screening Program, 1998-2000 Chronic diseases in Canada 26(2-3): 52-58
Wanhainen, A.; Lundgren, E.; Bergqvist, D.; Björck, M. 2006: Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening starts now. First out with the invitation of all 65-year old men is the county of Uppsala Lakartidningen 103(26-27): 2038-2039
Christiansen, J. 1975: Urine screening for drugs. a comparison between 2 methods Ugeskrift for Laeger 137(21): 1154-1157
Tze-Er, K.; Ya-Chang, S.; Kun-Yeh, T.; Tien-Chang, J.; Jan-Gowth Chang 2010: Comparison of Two Different Screening Methods for the KRAS Mutation in Colorectal Cancer Clinical Laboratory 56(5-6): 175-186
Darimont, J.; Grösch, S.; Skarke, C.; Geisslinger, G.; Lötsch, J. 2005: Comparison of two screening methods for in-house genotyping in clinical pharmacology units International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 43(1): 17-22
Martin, S.; Jensen, R.; Daly, L.; Jergenson, C.; Johnson, M.B.; Buell, T. 1997: Comparison of two methods of bedside blood glucose screening in the NICU: evaluation of accuracy and reliability Neonatal Network: Nn 16(2): 39-43
De Rautlin Y de la Roy 1975: Serological screening of streptococci. Comparison of 2 methods of slide agglutination, one with streptolysin alone, the other with several enzymes (Streptozymes) Pathologie-Biologie 23(7): 575-583
Kauppila, O.; Lauslahti, K.; Rissanen, P. 1971: A comparison of colcoscopic and cytological methods applied in Tampere's mass screening program, 1965-69 Duodecim; Laaketieteellinen Aikakauskirja 87(1): 45-51
Cox, B. 1994: Mammography screening under the age of 50 New Zealand Medical Journal 107(984): 340
Hadden, W. 1994: Mammography screening under the age of 50 New Zealand Medical Journal 107(982): 297
Vejborg, I.; Kroman, N.T. 2005: Mammography screening--again Ugeskrift for Laeger 167(7): 783; Author Reply 783-4
Scordamaglia, A.; Passalacqua, G.; Ruffoni, S.; Parodi, M.N.; Ciprandi, G.; Canonica, G.W. 1991: Two screening methods for detection of specific IgE to inhalant allergens. Comparison with skin prick test and RAST Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology 1(5): 324-329
Miller, A.B. 1994: Mammography screening controversies Cancer Detection and Prevention 18(4): 305-311
Gough, I.R. 2002: Screening mammography and mortality Medical Journal of Australia 177(6): 333; Author Reply 333
Wilkerson, B.F.; Schooff, M. 2000: Screening mammography may not be effective at any age Journal of Family Practice 49(4): 302 371
Nishikawa, R.M.; Schmidt, R.A.; Metz, C.E. 2007: Computer-aided screening mammography New England Journal of Medicine 357(1): 84; Author Reply 85
Reiertsen, O.; Reed, W. 1986: Should mammography screening be adopted in Norway? Tidsskrift for den Norske Laegeforening: Tidsskrift for Praktisk Medicin Ny Raekke 106(19-21): 1605-1607