Connection

Etta Pisano to United States

Back to Details
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Etta Pisano has written about United States.
Etta Pisano
Connection Strength
0.778
United States
  1. Risk-Based Screening Mammography for Women Aged <40: Outcomes From the National Mammography Database. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020 Mar; 17(3):368-376.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.069
  2. Big Data and Radiology Research. J Am Coll Radiol. 2019 Sep; 16(9 Pt B):1347-1350.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.069
  3. Robert McLelland, MD. Radiology. 2017 Dec; 285(3):1066.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.061
  4. Ultrasound as the Primary Screening Test for Breast Cancer: Analysis From ACRIN 6666. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016 Apr; 108(4).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.054
  5. Tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening. Clin Imaging. 2016 Mar-Apr; 40(2):283-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.053
  6. Impact of computer-aided detection systems on radiologist accuracy with digital mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Oct; 203(4):909-16.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.049
  7. Use of BI-RADS 3-probably benign category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial. Radiology. 2011 Jul; 260(1):61-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.039
  8. Mode of detection and secular time for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010; 2010(41):142-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  9. Premedical education. Acad Med. 2008 Dec; 83(12):1122; author reply 1122.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.033
  10. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology. 2008 Feb; 246(2):376-83.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.031
  11. Image quality in digital mammography: image acquisition. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Aug; 3(8):589-608.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  12. Storage, transmission, and retrieval of digital mammography, including recommendations on image compression. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Aug; 3(8):609-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
  13. Factors affecting increasing radiation dose for mammography in North Carolina from 1997 through 2001: an analysis of Food and Drug Administration annual surveys. Acad Radiol. 2004 May; 11(5):536-43.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.024
  14. Congressional update: Report from the Biomedical Imaging Program of the National Cancer Institute. American College of Radiology Imaging Network: The digital mammographic imaging screening trial--an update. Acad Radiol. 2002 Mar; 9(3):374-5.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  15. Factors affecting phantom scores at annual mammography facility inspections by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Acad Radiol. 2001 Sep; 8(9):864-70.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.020
  16. Has the mammography quality standards act affected the mammography quality in North Carolina? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000 Apr; 174(4):1089-91.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.018
  17. Current status of full-field digital mammography. Radiology. 2000 Jan; 214(1):26-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.018
  18. Men (and Women) in Academic Radiology: How Can We Reduce the Gender Discrepancy? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Apr; 206(4):678-80.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.013
  19. Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Functional Tumor Volume by MR Imaging Predicts Recurrence-free Survival-Results from the ACRIN 6657/CALGB 150007 I-SPY 1 TRIAL. Radiology. 2016 Apr; 279(1):44-55.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.013
  20. The politics of mammography. Radiol Clin North Am. 1992 Jan; 30(1):235-41.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  21. Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Feb; 194(2):362-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  22. Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology. 2010 Jan; 254(1):79-87.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  23. Comparison of soft-copy and hard-copy reading for full-field digital mammography. Radiology. 2009 Apr; 251(1):41-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  24. Core curriculum: research ethics for radiology residents. Acad Radiol. 2009 Jan; 16(1):108-16.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  25. A limitation of ACRIN DMIST. Radiology. 2008 Aug; 248(2):702; author reply 702-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  26. DMIST results: technologic or observer variability? Radiology. 2008 Aug; 248(2):703; author reply 703.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  27. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography breast cancer screening. Ann Intern Med. 2008 Jan 01; 148(1):1-10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  28. Cancer yield of mammography, MR, and US in high-risk women: prospective multi-institution breast cancer screening study. Radiology. 2007 Aug; 244(2):381-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  29. Factors affecting decreasing radiation dose for mammography in North Carolina after 2002: an analysis of Food and Drug Administration annual surveys. Acad Radiol. 2007 Jun; 14(6):685-91.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  30. Consensus review: A method of assessment of calcifications that appropriately undergo a six-month follow-up. Acad Radiol. 2006 May; 13(5):621-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  31. Estrogen-plus-progestin use and mammographic density in postmenopausal women: Women's Health Initiative randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Sep 21; 97(18):1366-76.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  32. Stereotactic and sonographic large-core biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: results of the Radiologic Diagnostic Oncology Group V study. Acad Radiol. 2004 Mar; 11(3):293-308.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.