{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2024,9,16]],"date-time":"2024-09-16T06:26:42Z","timestamp":1726468002036},"reference-count":82,"publisher":"Elsevier BV","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2018,7,1]],"date-time":"2018-07-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1530403200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/tdm\/userlicense\/1.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2018,7,1]],"date-time":"2018-07-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1530403200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/tdm\/userlicense\/1.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["clinicalkey.jp","clinicalkey.com","clinicalimaging.org","clinicalkey.es","clinicalkey.com.au","clinicalkey.fr","elsevier.com","sciencedirect.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Clinical Imaging"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,7]]},"DOI":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,12,27]],"date-time":"2017-12-27T03:14:44Z","timestamp":1514344484000},"page":"91","update-policy":"http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1016\/elsevier_cm_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"special_numbering":"C","title":["Publisher\u2019s Note"],"prefix":"10.1016","volume":"50","member":"78","reference":[{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0005","series-title":"The Life of Reason: Reason in Common Sense","volume":"284","author":"Santayana","year":"1905"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0015","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"580","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.10220","article-title":"Beyond randomized, controlled trials: organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast cancer mortality","volume":"94","author":"Kopans","year":"2002","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0030","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"The Breast Cancer Screening \u201cArcade\u201d and the \u201cWhack a Mole\u201d Efforts to Reduce Access to Screening. Seminars in Ultrasound, CT, and MRI DOI https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1053\/j.sult.2017.06.002 (in press).","DOI":"10.1053\/j.sult.2017.06.002"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0035","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"15","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.10100057","article-title":"The 2009 U.S. preventive services task force guidelines ignore important scientific evidence and should be revised or withdrawn","volume":"256","author":"Kopans","year":"2010","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0040","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"The Breast Cancer Screening \u201cArcade\u201d and the \u201cWhack a Mole\u201d Efforts to Reduce Access to Screening. Seminars in Ultrasound, CT, and MRI DOI https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1053\/j.sult.2017.06.002 (in press).","DOI":"10.1053\/j.sult.2017.06.002"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0045","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"894","DOI":"10.1148\/75.6.894","article-title":"Experience with mammography in a tumor institution: evaluation of 1000 cases","volume":"75","author":"Egan","year":"1960","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"year":"1988","series-title":"Periodic screening for breast cancer: the health insurance plan project and its sequelae, 1963\u20131986","author":"Shapiro","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0050"},{"issue":"4","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0055","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"846","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.121.4.846","article-title":"Analysis of 462 breast carcinomas","volume":"121","author":"Wolfe","year":"1974","journal-title":"Am J Roentgenol Radium Therapy, Nucl Med"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0060","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"201","DOI":"10.1148\/89.2.201","article-title":"A study of breast parenchyma by mammography in the normal woman and those with benign and malignant disease of the breast","volume":"89","author":"Wolfe","year":"1967","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"4","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0065","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"194","DOI":"10.3322\/canjclin.32.4.194","article-title":"Breast cancer detection demonstration project: five-year summary report","volume":"32","author":"Baker","year":"1982","journal-title":"CA Cancer J Clin"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0070","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"77","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-84-1-77","article-title":"Mammography: a contrary view","volume":"84","author":"Bailar","year":"1976","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0075","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"818","DOI":"10.1002\/(SICI)1097-0142(19960301)77:5<818::AID-CNCR2>3.0.CO;2-A","article-title":"Assessment of radiation risk from screening mammography","volume":"77","author":"Feig","year":"1996","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0080","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"246","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.10100570","article-title":"Radiation doses and cancer risks from breast imaging studies","volume":"257","author":"Hendrick","year":"2010","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0085","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"903","DOI":"10.1002\/(SICI)1097-0142(19960301)77:5<903::AID-CNCR15>3.0.CO;2-7","article-title":"Benefits versus risks from mammography: a critical assessment","volume":"77","author":"Mettler","year":"1996","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0090","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"578","DOI":"10.1097\/HP.0b013e3182254e93","article-title":"Just the facts: mammography saves lives with little if any radiation risk to the mature breast","volume":"101","author":"Kopans","year":"2011","journal-title":"Health Phys"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0095","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"98","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.10100655","article-title":"Risk of radiation-induced breast cancer from mammographic screening","volume":"258","author":"Yaffe","year":"2011","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"10","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0100","first-page":"1459","article-title":"Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 1. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40 to 49years","volume":"147","author":"Miller","year":"1992","journal-title":"CMAJ"},{"issue":"11","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0105","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"832","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/84.11.832","volume":"84","author":"Author of Canadian Breast Cancer Study Retracts Warnings","year":"1992","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0110","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e376","DOI":"10.3747\/co.22.2880","article-title":"Breast cancer screening panels continue to confuse the facts and inject their own biases","volume":"22","author":"Kopans","year":"2015","journal-title":"Curr Oncol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0115","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"748","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.155.4.ajronline_155_4_001","article-title":"The Canadian screening program: a different perspective","volume":"155","author":"Kopans","year":"1990","journal-title":"AJR"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0120","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"793","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rcl.2004.06.014","article-title":"The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned?","volume":"42","author":"Smith","year":"2004","journal-title":"Radiol Clin N Am"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0125","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"9","DOI":"10.1007\/s10549-017-4302-9","article-title":"The Canadian National Breast Screening Studies are compromised and their results are unreliable. They should not factor into decisions about breast cancer screening","volume":"165","author":"Kopans","year":"2017","journal-title":"Breast Cancer Res Treat"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0130","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"342","DOI":"10.1007\/s00330-015-3849-2","article-title":"Conclusions for mammography screening after 25-year follow-up of the Canadian National Breast Cancer Screening Study (CNBSS)","volume":"26","author":"Heywang-K\u00f6brunner","year":"2016","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0140","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1644","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/85.20.1644","article-title":"Report of the international workshop on screening for breast cancer","volume":"85","author":"Fletcher","year":"1993","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0145","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1196","DOI":"10.1002\/1097-0142(19940815)74:4<1196::AID-CNCR2820740403>3.0.CO;2-Y","article-title":"Statistical power in breast cancer screening trials and mortality reduction among women 40\u201349 with particular emphasis on the National Breast Screening Study of Canada","volume":"74","author":"Kopans","year":"1994","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0150","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"87","DOI":"10.1093\/jncimono\/1997.22.87","article-title":"Benefit of screening ammography in women ages 40\u201349: a new meta- analysis of randomized controlled trials","volume":"22","author":"Hendrick","year":"1997","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr"},{"issue":"4","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0160","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"279","DOI":"10.7326\/M15-2886","article-title":"Screening for breast cancer: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement","volume":"164","author":"Siu","year":"2016","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"issue":"15","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0165","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1599","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2015.12783","article-title":"Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 guideline update from the American Cancer Society","volume":"314","author":"Oeffinger","year":"2015","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0170","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"829","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(85)92204-4","article-title":"Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography","volume":"1","author":"Tabar","year":"1985","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0175","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"37","DOI":"10.1148\/radiology.161.1.3532183","article-title":"Breast cancer: age-specific growth rates and screening strategies","volume":"161","author":"Moskowitz","year":"1986","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0180","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"547","DOI":"10.1038\/bjc.1987.112","article-title":"What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial","volume":"55","author":"Tab\u00e1r","year":"1987","journal-title":"Br J Cancer"},{"year":"1989","series-title":"Press release from the National Medical Roundtable on Mammography screening guidelines","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0185"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0190","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1644","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/85.20.1644","article-title":"Report of the international workshop on screening for breast cancer","volume":"85","author":"Fletcher","year":"1993","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"year":"1994","series-title":"Misused Science: The National Cancer Institutes Elimination of Mammography Guidelines for Women in Their Forties. Union Calendar No. 480. House Report 103-863","author":"House Committee on Government Operations","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0195"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0200","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"87","DOI":"10.1093\/jncimono\/1997.22.87","article-title":"Benefit of screening mammography in women ages 40\u201349: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","volume":"22","author":"Hendrick","year":"1997","journal-title":"Monogr Natl Cancer Inst"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0205","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"4","DOI":"10.1148\/radiology.210.1.r99ja504","article-title":"The breast cancer screening controversy and the National Institutes of Health consensus development conference on breast cancer screening for women ages 40\u201349","volume":"210","author":"Kopans","year":"1999","journal-title":"Radiology"},{"issue":"8","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0210","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"538","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/89.8.538","article-title":"NCI adopts new mammography screening guidelines for women","volume":"89","author":"Eastman","year":"1997","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0220","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"511","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-146-7-200704030-00007","article-title":"Screening mammography for women 40 to 49years of age: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians","volume":"146","author":"Amir Qaseem","year":"2007","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0225","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Kopans DB. The 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines are not supported by science: the scientific support for mammography screening. Radiol Clin N Am Volume 48, Issue 5, Pages 843\u2013857.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rcl.2010.06.005"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0230","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"W112","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.10.5609","article-title":"United States preventive services task force screening mammography recommendations: science ignored","volume":"196","author":"Hendrick","year":"2011","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"issue":"1 Suppl","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0235","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"311","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.2820741316","article-title":"Screening for breast cancer and mortality reduction among women 40\u201349years of age","volume":"74","author":"Kopans","year":"1994","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0240","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2444","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.1993.03510200050031","article-title":"Positive predictive value of screening mammography by age and family history of breast cancer","volume":"270","author":"Kerlikowske","year":"1993","journal-title":"JAMA"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0245","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"139","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1524-4741.1998.430139.x","article-title":"Biasing the interpretation of mammography screening data by age grouping: nothing changes abruptly at age 50","volume":"4","author":"Kopans","year":"1998","journal-title":"Breast J"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0250","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"843","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rcl.2010.06.005","article-title":"The 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines are not supported by science: the scientific support for mammography screening","volume":"48","author":"Kopans","year":"2010","journal-title":"Radiol Clin N Am"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0255","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e376","DOI":"10.3747\/co.22.2880","article-title":"Breast cancer screening panels continue to confuse the facts and inject their own biases","volume":"22","author":"Kopans","year":"2015","journal-title":"Curr Oncol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0260","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"68","DOI":"10.3322\/canjclin.52.2.68","article-title":"The mammographic screening trials: commentary on the recent work by Olsen and Gotzsche","volume":"52","author":"Duffy","year":"2002","journal-title":"CA Cancer J Clin"},{"issue":"9855","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0265","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1778","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(12)61611-0","volume":"380","year":"2012","journal-title":"Lancet (London, England)"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0270","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1724","DOI":"10.1002\/1097-0142(20010501)91:9<1724::AID-CNCR1190>3.0.CO;2-V","article-title":"Beyond randomized controlled trials: organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast carcinoma mortality","volume":"91","author":"Tabar","year":"2001","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0275","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"458","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.10765","article-title":"The impact of organized mammography service screening on breast carcinoma mortality in seven Swedish counties","volume":"95","author":"Duffy","year":"2002","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0280","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"411","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(03)13132-7","article-title":"Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breast-cancer mortality: a systematic review","volume":"361","author":"Otto","year":"2003","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0285","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"45","DOI":"10.1158\/1055-9965.EPI-05-0349","article-title":"Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organized service screening with mammography: 1. Further confirmation with extended data","volume":"15","author":"Swedish Organised Service Screening Evaluation Group","year":"2006","journal-title":"Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0290","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1076","DOI":"10.1002\/ijc.22249","article-title":"Breast cancer mortality after screening mammography in British Columbia women","volume":"120","author":"Coldman","year":"2007","journal-title":"Int J Cancer"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0295","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"87","DOI":"10.1258\/096914107781261918","article-title":"Service screening with mammography in Northern Sweden: effects on breast cancer mortality - an update","volume":"14","author":"Jonsson","year":"2007","journal-title":"J Med Screen"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0300","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1569","DOI":"10.1007\/s10552-010-9585-7","article-title":"A remarkable reduction of breast cancer deaths in screened versus unscreened women: a case-referent study","volume":"21","author":"Paap","year":"2010","journal-title":"Cancer Causes Control"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0305","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"66","DOI":"10.1158\/1055-9965.EPI-11-0476","article-title":"National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening. Mammography screening and risk of breast cancer death: a population-based case-control study","volume":"21","author":"Otto","year":"2012","journal-title":"Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev"},{"issue":"6","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0310","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"10","DOI":"10.1038\/bjc.2011.44","article-title":"Increasingly strong reduction in breast cancer mortality due to screening","volume":"104","author":"van Schoor","year":"2011","journal-title":"Br J Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0315","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"738","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-151-10-200911170-00010","article-title":"Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms","volume":"151","author":"Mandelblatt","year":"2009","journal-title":"Ann Intern Med"},{"issue":"4","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0320","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"714","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.25650","article-title":"Effectiveness of population-based service screening with mammography for women ages 40 to 49years: evaluation of the Swedish Mammography Screening in Young Women (SCRY) cohort","volume":"117","author":"Hellquist","year":"2011","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"issue":"Suppl. 1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0325","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"14","DOI":"10.1258\/jms.2012.012078","article-title":"The impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in Europe: a review of observational studies","volume":"19","author":"Broeders","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Med Screen"},{"issue":"17","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0330","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3106","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.28174","article-title":"Breast cancer mortality in participants of the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program","volume":"119","author":"Hofvind","year":"2013","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0335","first-page":"17","article-title":"Population-based service mammography screening: the Icelandic experience","volume":"5","author":"Sigurdsson","year":"2013","journal-title":"Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press)"},{"issue":"11","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0340","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/dju261","article-title":"Pan-canadian study of mammography screening and mortality from breast cancer","volume":"106","author":"Coldman","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0345","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"109","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejca.2016.12.030","article-title":"Advanced breast cancer rates in the epoch of service screening: the 400,000 women cohort study from Italy","volume":"75","author":"Puliti","year":"2017","journal-title":"Eur J Cancer"},{"issue":"18","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0350","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2839","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.28199","article-title":"A failure analysis of invasive breast cancer: most deaths from disease occur in women not regularly screened","volume":"120","author":"Webb","year":"2014","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0355","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"125","DOI":"10.21037\/gs.2016.12.15","article-title":"More misinformation on breast cancer screening","volume":"6","author":"Kopans","year":"2017","journal-title":"Gland Surg"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0360","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"107","DOI":"10.1634\/theoncologist.2013-0184","article-title":"Arguments against mammography screening continue to be based on faulty science","volume":"19","author":"Kopans","year":"2014","journal-title":"Oncologist"},{"issue":"17","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0365","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2649","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.28784","article-title":"Reduction in late-stage breast cancer incidence in the mammography era: implications for overdiagnosis of invasive cancer","volume":"120","author":"Helvie","year":"2014","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"issue":"12","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0370","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","DOI":"10.1093\/jnci\/dju315","article-title":"A reality check for overdiagnosis estimates associated with breast cancer screening","volume":"106","author":"Etzioni","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Natl Cancer Inst"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0375","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"863","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2017.01.038","article-title":"Persistent untreated screening-detected breast cancer: an argument against delaying screening or increasing the interval between screenings","volume":"14","author":"Arleo","year":"2017","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"issue":"19","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0380","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3673","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.30842","article-title":"Comparison of recommendations for screening mammography using CISNET models","volume":"123","author":"Arleo","year":"2017","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0385","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"W112","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.10.5609","article-title":"USPSTF guidelines on screening mammography recommendations: science ignored","volume":"196","author":"Hendrick","year":"2011","journal-title":"Am J Roentgenol"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0390","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"125","DOI":"10.21037\/gs.2016.12.15","article-title":"More misinformation on breast cancer screening","volume":"6","author":"Kopans","year":"2017","journal-title":"Gland Surg"},{"issue":"9","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0395","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1137","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jacr.2017.06.001","article-title":"Breast cancer screening for average-risk women: recommendations from the ACR Commission on Breast Imaging","volume":"14","author":"Monticciolo","year":"2017","journal-title":"J Am Coll Radiol"},{"issue":"22","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0400","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2304","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.2013.52.5386","article-title":"Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI","volume":"32","author":"Kuhl","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Clin Oncol"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0405","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2951","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.11434","article-title":"Simple model of breast cancer growth may provide explanations for observations of apparently complex phenomena","volume":"97","author":"Kopans","year":"2003","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0410","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"713","DOI":"10.1002\/cncr.10742","article-title":"Predicting the survival of patients with breast carcinoma using tumor size","volume":"95","author":"Michaelson","year":"2002","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0415","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"h4901","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.h4901","article-title":"Influence of tumour stage at breast cancer detection on survival in modern times: population based study in 173,797 patients","volume":"351","author":"Saadatmand","year":"2015","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"issue":"7261","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0420","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"624","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.321.7261.624","article-title":"Breast cancer\u2014epidemiology, risk factors, and genetics","volume":"321","author":"McPherson","year":"2000","journal-title":"BMJ [Br Med J]"},{"issue":"5","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0425","first-page":"301","article-title":"A different perspective on breast cancer risk factors: some implications of nonattributable risk","volume":"32","author":"Seidman","year":"1982","journal-title":"Cancer"},{"issue":"6","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0430","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1360","DOI":"10.2214\/AJR.15.14668","article-title":"The potential impact of risk-based screening mammography in women 40\u201349years old","volume":"205","author":"Price","year":"2015","journal-title":"AJR Am J Roentgenol"},{"issue":"1","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0435","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"7","DOI":"10.3322\/caac.21332","article-title":"Cancer statistics, 2016","volume":"66","author":"Siegel","year":"2016","journal-title":"CA Cancer J Clin"},{"issue":"2","key":"10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013_bb0440","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"583","DOI":"10.1148\/radiol.2016151581","article-title":"Benefit to radiation risk of breast-specific gamma imaging compared with mammography in screening asymptomatic women with dense breasts","volume":"281","author":"Hendrick","year":"2016","journal-title":"Radiology"}],"container-title":["Clinical Imaging"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0899707117302632?httpAccept=text\/xml","content-type":"text\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0899707117302632?httpAccept=text\/plain","content-type":"text\/plain","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2019,10,8]],"date-time":"2019-10-08T14:50:21Z","timestamp":1570546221000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/linkinghub.elsevier.com\/retrieve\/pii\/S0899707117302632"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2018,7]]},"references-count":82,"alternative-id":["S0899707117302632"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013","relation":{},"ISSN":["0899-7071"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0899-7071"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2018,7]]},"assertion":[{"value":"Elsevier","name":"publisher","label":"This article is maintained by"},{"value":"Breast cancer screening: Where have we been and where are we going? A personal perspective based on history, data and experience","name":"articletitle","label":"Article Title"},{"value":"Clinical Imaging","name":"journaltitle","label":"Journal Title"},{"value":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.clinimag.2017.12.013","name":"articlelink","label":"CrossRef DOI link to publisher maintained version"},{"value":"article","name":"content_type","label":"Content Type"},{"value":"\u00a9 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.","name":"copyright","label":"Copyright"}]}}