Jacky Luiten

30 | Chapter 2 19. Otten JD, Karssemeijer N, Hendriks JH, Groenewoud JH, Fracheboud J, Verbeek AL, de Koning HJ, Holland R. Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97(10):748–754. 20. Klompenhouwer EG, Voogd AC, den Heeten GJ, Strobbe LJ, de Haan AF, Wauters CA, Broeders MJ, Duijm LE. Blinded double reading yields a higher programme sensitivity than nonblinded double reading at digital screening mammography: a prospected population based study in the south of The Netherlands. Eur J Cancer 2015;51(3):391–399. 21. Klompenhouwer EG, Voogd AC, den Heeten GJ, Strobbe LJ, Tjan‐Heijnen VC, Broeders MJ, Duijm LE. Discrepant screening mammography assessments at blinded and non‐blinded double reading: impact of arbitration by a third reader on screening outcome. Eur Radiol 2015;25(10):2821–2829. 22. van Breest Smallenburg V, Duijm LE, den Heeten GJ, Groenewoud JH, Jansen FH, Fracheboud J, Plaisier ML, van Doorne‐Nagtegaal HJ, Broeders MJ. Two‐view versus single‐view mammography at subsequent screening in a region of the Dutch breast screening programme. Eur J Radiol 2012;81(9):2189–2194. 23. Dowling EC, Klabunde C, Patnick J, Ballard‐Barbash R. Breast and cervical cancer screening programme implementation in 16 countries. J Med Screen 2010;17(3):139–146. 24. Smith‐Bindman R, Chu PW, Miglioretti DL, Sickles EA, Blanks R, Ballard‐Barbash R, Bobo JK, Lee NC, Wallis MG, Patnick J et al. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom. JAMA 2003;290(16):2129–2137.