Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation

Search Page

Filters

My Custom Filters

Publication date

Text availability

Article attribute

Article type

Additional filters

Article Language

Species

Sex

Age

Other

Search Results

98 results

Filters applied: . Clear all
Results are displayed in a computed author sort order. The Publication Date timeline is not available.
Page 1
Misdiagnosis in breast imaging: a statement paper from European Society Breast Imaging (EUSOBI)-Part 1: The role of common errors in radiology in missed breast cancer and implications of misdiagnosis.
Thomassin-Naggara I, Kilburn-Toppin F, Athanasiou A, Forrai G, Ispas M, Lesaru M, Giannotti E, Pinker-Domenig K, Van Ongeval C, Gilbert F, Mann RM, Pediconi F; EUSOBI Board. Thomassin-Naggara I, et al. Among authors: van ongeval c. Eur Radiol. 2024 Nov 15. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11128-1. Online ahead of print. Eur Radiol. 2024. PMID: 39545978 Review.
Misdiagnosis in breast imaging: a statement paper from European Society Breast Imaging (EUSOBI)-Part 2: Main causes of errors in breast imaging and recommendations from European Society of Breast Imaging to limit misdiagnosis.
Thomassin-Naggara I, Athanasiou A, Kilburn-Toppin F, Forrai G, Ispas M, Lesaru M, Giannotti E, Pinker-Domenig K, Van Ongeval C, Mann RM, Gilbert F, Pediconi F; EUSOBI Board. Thomassin-Naggara I, et al. Among authors: van ongeval c. Eur Radiol. 2024 Nov 15. doi: 10.1007/s00330-024-11133-4. Online ahead of print. Eur Radiol. 2024. PMID: 39545979 Review.
How does image quality affect radiologists' perceived ability for image interpretation and lesion detection in digital mammography?
Boita J, van Engen RE, Mackenzie A, Tingberg A, Bosmans H, Bolejko A, Zackrisson S, Wallis MG, Ikeda DM, Van Ongeval C, Pijnappel R, Broeders M, Sechopoulos I; VISUAL group. Boita J, et al. Among authors: van engen re, van ongeval c. Eur Radiol. 2021 Jul;31(7):5335-5343. doi: 10.1007/s00330-020-07679-8. Epub 2021 Jan 21. Eur Radiol. 2021. PMID: 33475774 Free PMC article.
Development and content validity evaluation of a candidate instrument to assess image quality in digital mammography: A mixed-method study.
Boita J, Bolejko A, Zackrisson S, Wallis MG, Ikeda DM, Van Ongeval C, van Engen RE, Mackenzie A, Tingberg A, Bosmans H, Pijnappel R, Sechopoulos I, Broeders M. Boita J, et al. Among authors: van ongeval c, van engen re. Eur J Radiol. 2021 Jan;134:109464. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109464. Epub 2020 Dec 2. Eur J Radiol. 2021. PMID: 33307458 Free article.
Validation of a candidate instrument to assess image quality in digital mammography using ROC analysis.
Boita J, van Engen RE, Mackenzie A, Tingberg A, Bosmans H, Bolejko A, Zackrisson S, Wallis MG, Ikeda DM, van Ongeval C, Pijnappel R, Broeders M, Sechopoulos I. Boita J, et al. Among authors: van engen re, van ongeval c. Eur J Radiol. 2021 Jun;139:109686. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109686. Epub 2021 Mar 30. Eur J Radiol. 2021. PMID: 33819803 Free article.
Virtual clinical trial to compare cancer detection using combinations of 2D mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis and synthetic 2D imaging.
Mackenzie A, Thomson EL, Mitchell M, Elangovan P, van Ongeval C, Cockmartin L, Warren LM, Wilkinson LS, Wallis MG, Given-Wilson RM, Dance DR, Young KC. Mackenzie A, et al. Among authors: van ongeval c. Eur Radiol. 2022 Feb;32(2):806-814. doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-08197-x. Epub 2021 Jul 30. Eur Radiol. 2022. PMID: 34331118
International Day of Radiology: Breast Imaging.
Van Ongeval C, Soens J, Van Goethem M. Van Ongeval C, et al. Among authors: van goethem m. J Belg Soc Radiol. 2016 Nov 19;100(1):107. doi: 10.5334/jbr-btr.1232. J Belg Soc Radiol. 2016. PMID: 30038990 Free PMC article.
Screen-detected versus interval cancers: Effect of imaging modality and breast density in the Flemish Breast Cancer Screening Programme.
Timmermans L, Bleyen L, Bacher K, Van Herck K, Lemmens K, Van Ongeval C, Van Steen A, Martens P, De Brabander I, Goossens M, Thierens H. Timmermans L, et al. Among authors: van ongeval c, van steen a, van herck k. Eur Radiol. 2017 Sep;27(9):3810-3819. doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-4757-4. Epub 2017 Mar 13. Eur Radiol. 2017. PMID: 28289944
Technical and clinical breast cancer screening performance indicators for computed radiography versus direct digital radiography.
Bosmans H, De Hauwere A, Lemmens K, Zanca F, Thierens H, Van Ongeval C, Van Herck K, Van Steen A, Martens P, Bleyen L, Vande Putte G, Kellen E, Mortier G, Van Limbergen E. Bosmans H, et al. Among authors: van ongeval c, van steen a, van herck k, van limbergen e. Eur Radiol. 2013 Oct;23(10):2891-8. doi: 10.1007/s00330-013-2876-0. Epub 2013 May 21. Eur Radiol. 2013. PMID: 23689308
98 results