1.Mandelson MT., Oestreicher N., Porter PL., White D., Finder CA., Taplin SH, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammo-graphic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-de-tected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000. 92:1081–1087.
Article
2.Kolb TM., Lichy J., Newhouse JH. Comparison of the perfor-mance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002. 225:165–175.
Article
3.Berg WA., Gutierrez L., NessAiver MS., Carter WB., Bhargavan M., Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004. 233:830–849.
Article
4.Leong LC., Gogna A., Pant R., Ng FC., Sim LS. Supplementary breast ultrasound screening in Asian women with negative but dense mammograms-a pilot study. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2012. 41:432–439.
5.Kelly KM., Dean J., Comulada WS., Lee SJ. Breast cancer de-tection using automated whole breast ultrasound and mammography in radiographically dense breasts. Eur Radiol. 2010. 20:734–742.
Article
6.Parris T., Wakefield D., Frimmer H. Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Con-necticut Bill 458. Breast J. 2013. 19:64–70.
Article
7.Shen SJ., Sun Q., Xu YL., Zhou YD., Guan JH., Mao F, et al. [Comparative analysis of early diagnostic tools for breast cancer]. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2012. 34:877–880.
8.Feig SA., Hall FM., Ikeda DM., Mendelson EB., Rubin EC., Segel MC, et al. Society of Breast Imaging residency and fellow-ship training curriculum. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000. 38:915–920. xi.
Article
9.Bassett LW., Monsees BS., Smith RA., Wang L., Hooshi P., Far-ria DM, et al. Survey of radiology residents: breast imaging training and attitudes. Radiology. 2003. 227:862–869.
Article
10.Burhenne LJ., Smith RA., Tabar L., Dean PB., Perry N., Sickles EA. Mammographic screening: international perspective. Semin Roentgenol. 2001. 36:187–194.
11.American College of Radiology. ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. 5th ed.Reston, VA: American College of Radiology;2013.
12.American College of Radiology. ACR BI-RADS Breast Im-aging and Reporting Data System: Breast Imaging Atlas. 4th ed.Reston, VA: American College of Radiology;2003.
13.Kim EK., Ko KH., Oh KK., Kwak JY., You JK., Kim MJ, et al. Clini-cal application of the BI-RADS final assessment to breast sonography in conjunction with mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008. 190:1209–1215.
Article
14.Lazarus E., Mainiero MB., Schepps B., Koelliker SL., Livingston LS. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interob-server variability and positive predictive value. Radiology. 2006. 239:385–391.
Article
15.Hamy AS., Giacchetti S., Albiter M., de Bazelaire C., Cuvier C., Perret F, et al. BI-RADS categorisation of 2,708 consecutive nonpalpable breast lesions in patients referred to a dedicated breast care unit. Eur Radiol. 2012. 22:9–17.
Article
16.Park CS., Lee JH., Yim HW., Kang BJ., Kim HS., Jung JI, et al. Observer agreement using the ACR Breast Imaging Re-porting and Data System (BI-RADS)-ultrasound, first edition (2003). Korean J Radiol. 2007. 8:397–402.
Article
17.Lee HJ., Kim EK., Kim MJ., Youk JH., Lee JY., Kang DR, et al. Ob-server variability of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Sys-tem (BI-RADS) for breast ultrasound. Eur J Radiol. 2008. 65:293–298.
Article
18.Lee EH., Lyou CY. Radiology residents' performance in screening mammography interpretation. J Korean Soc Radiol. 2013. 68:333–341.
Article
19.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Mammography facilities. Web site.http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfMQSA/mqsa.cfm. Accessed Sep 2, 2015.