4. Breast cancer screening

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Volumn 55, Issue 8, 2001, Pages 531-535

  Michell, M I ^a  

^a KING S COLLEGE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EXCISION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PARENCHYMA; PLANNING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ULTRASOUND; BIOPSY; BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; AGED; BIOPSY; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 0034740354     PISSN: 13685031     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Tahur L, Fagerberg G, Gad A. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Lancet 1985; i: 829-832.
2. Tabar L, Fagerberg G. Duffy S et til. Update of the Swedish two county programme of mammography screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 1992; 30: 187-210.
3. Tabar L. Vitak B, Chen H et al. The Swedish two county trial twenty years later. Radiol Clin North Am 2000: 38: 625-651.
4. Screening brief: breast cancer. J Med Screen 1994; 1: 73.
5. Forrcst APM. Breast cancer screening: report to the Health Ministers of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. London: HMSO, 1986.
6. Tabar L. Dean P. Kaufman M et al. A new era in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Surf; Clin North Am 2000; 9: 233-277.
7. Van Dijck J A A M. Verbeek ALM, Hendricks JHCL; al. One view versus two view mammography in baseline screening for breast cancer: a review. Br J Radiol 1992:65: 971-976.
8. Wald NJ. Murphy P. Major P et al. UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening. BMJ 1995:311: 1189-1193.
9. Blanks RG. Moss SM, Wallis MG. A comparison of two view and one view mammography in the detection of small invasive cancers: results from the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. J Med Screen 1996:3: 200-203.
10. Blanks RG, Moss SM, Wallis MG. Use of two view mammography compared with one view in the detection of small invasive cancers: further results from the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. J Med Screen 1997:4: 98-101.
11. Blanks RG. Given Wilson R, Moss SM. The efficiency of cancer detection during routine repeat (incident) mammographie screening: two versus one view mammography. J Med Screen 1998; 5: 141-145.
12. Young KC, Wallis MG, Ramsdale ML. Mammographie film density and detection of small breast cancers. Clin Radiol 1994; 49: 461-465.
13. Anderson EDC, Muir BB, Walsh JS et al. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast cancer screening. Clin Radiol 1994: 49: 248-251,
14. Denton ERE, Field S. Just how valuable is double reporting in screening mammography? din Radiol 1997; 52: 466-468.
15. Blanks RG. Wallis MG. Moss SM. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. J Med Screen 1998; 5: 195-201.
16. Ong GL. Austoker J. Michell MJ. Early recall re-screen/recall in the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme: epidemiological data. J Med Screen 1998:5: 146-155.
17. NHS Breast Screening Programme. NHS Breast Screening Programme Review. Sheffield: NHSBSP Publications. 2000.
18. NHS Breast Screening Radiologists Quality Assurance Committee. Quality assurance guidelines for radiologists. Sheffield: NHSBSP Publications, 1997.
19. Blanks RG. Day 1MB. Moss SM. Monitoring the performance of breast screening programmes: use of indirect standardisation in evaluating the invasive cancer detection rate../ Med Screen 1996:3: 79-81.
20. Blanks RG. Moss SM. Monitoring the performance of breast cancer screening programmes: allowing for geographical variation in breast cancer incidence. J Med Screen 1996; 3: 82-84.
21. Blanks RG. Moss SM. Patnick J. Results from the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme 1994-1999. J Med Screen 2000; 7: 195-198.
22. Nystrom L. How effective is screening for breast cancer? BMJ 2000; 321: 647-648.
23. McCann J. Duffy S. Day N. Predicted long term mortality reduction associated with the second round of breast screening in East Anglia. Rr J Cancer 2000:84(2): 1-8.