73. Lohnberg A, van der Meulen B, Brown N, Nelis A, Rappert B, Webster A, Cabello C, Rosales M, Sanz-Menéndez L. 1999. Studying Innovation Strategies for Future Medical Technologies: Conceptual Framework and Methodologies for the FORMAKIN Project. European Commission Targeted Socio-Economic Research Programme.

74. Lynge E, Olsen AH, Fracheboud J, Patnick J. 2003. Reporting of performance indicators of mammography screening in Europe. Eur J Cancer Prev 12(3):213-222.

75. Maguire P. 2003. Is an access crisis on the horizon in mammography? ACP Observer.

76. Mainiero MB. 2003. Breast-Imaging Specialists Are More Efficient Than General Radiologists at Reading Mammograms. 103rd Annual American Roentgen Ray Society Meeting. San Diego, CA.

77. Marbella AM, Layde PM. 2001. Racial trends in age-specific breast cancer mortality rates in US women. Am J Public Health 91(1):118-121.

78. Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Leatherman S, Brook RH. 2000. The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. JAMA 283(14):1866-1874.

79. Meadows S, Wingert P, Rosenberg D, Carmichael M, Johnson D, Childress S, Sinderbrand R, Breslau K, Shenfeld H. 2003. Civil Wars. Newsweek. Pp. 43-51.

80. Mehta TS. 2003. Current uses of ultrasound in the evaluation of the breast. Radiol Clin North Am 41(4):841-856.

81. Meyer JE, Eberlein TJ, Stomper PC, Sonnenfeld MR. 1990. Biopsy of occult breast lesions. Analysis of 1261 abnormalities. JAMA 263(17):2341-2343.

82. Miller AM, Champion VL. 1997. Attitudes about breast cancer and mammography: racial, income, and educational differences. Women Health 26(1):41-63.

83. Mitchell J, Lannin DR, Mathews HF, Swanson MS. 2002. Religious beliefs and breast cancer screening. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 11(10):907-915.

84. Mitka M. 2003. Researchers seek mammography alternatives. JAMA 290(4):450-451.

85. Monsees B. 2002. Is the GAO report on mammography correct? SBI News.

86. Monsees B. 2002. The breast imaging profession: take my job, please! SBI News.

87. Mourad WG. 2003, May 5. Mammography equipment evaluations and the annual survey—is your equipment up to the task? Accessed March 24, 2004. Web Page. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/mammography/scorecard-article4.html.

88. National Cancer Institute. 2004. Fifth National Forum on Biomedical Imaging in Oncology Meeting Summary. Bethesda, MD.

89. National Health Service. Cancer Screening Programmes. 2003. NHS Breast Screening Programme Annual Review 2003.

90. Newman LA, Mason J, Cote D, Vin Y, Carolin K, Bouwman D, Colditz GA. 2002. African-American ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and breast cancer survival: a metaanalysis of 14 studies involving over 10,000 African-American and 40,000 White American patients with carcinoma of the breast. Cancer 94(11):2844-2854.

91. Oluwole SF, Ali AO, Adu A, Blane BP, Barlow B, Oropeza R, Freeman HP. 2003. Impact of a cancer screening program on breast cancer stage at diagnosis in a medically underserved urban community. J Am Coll Surg 196(2):180-188.

92. Pal S. 2003, November 30. Women with genetic history of breast cancer benefit from MR screening. Accessed February 19, 2004. Web Page. Available at: http://www.auntminnie.com/default.asp?Sec=rca&Sub=rsna_2003&pag=dis&ItemId=60243&stm=November+30%2C+2003+pal.

93. Pallarito K. 2003, February 27. Spike in malpractice premiums hurting access to care—survery. Accessed February 28, 2003. Web Page. Available at: http://www.auntminnie.com/default.asp?Sec=sup&Sub=imc&Pag=dis&ItemId=57516.

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement