Skip Navigation

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2000 92(20):1625; doi:10.1093/jnci/92.20.1625-a
© 2000 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Arnold, K.
Right arrow Articles by Eckstein, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Arnold, K.
Right arrow Articles by Eckstein, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 92, No. 20, 1625, October 18, 2000
© 2000 Oxford University Press

MEMORANDUM FOR: Science Writers and Editors on the Journal Press List

Factors Identified That Can Lead to False-Positive Mammograms

October 12, 2000 (EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE 4 P.M. EST October 17)

Katherine Arnold, Deputy News Editor, Dan Eckstein, (301) 986-1891, ext. 112

Some women face a nearly 100% chance of having a false-positive result after nine screening mammograms for breast cancer.

Because a woman may have 30 or more screening mammograms over her lifetime, Cindy Christiansen, Ph.D., Boston University School of Public Health, and colleagues identified those characteristics of women and their radiologists that were the most powerful . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?