• 1
    Malin JL, Schuster MA, Kahn KA, Brook RH. Quality of breast cancer care: what do we know? J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20: 43814393.
  • 2
    Fox CH, Mahoney MC. Improving diabetes preventive care in a family practice residency program: a case study in continuous quality improvement. Fam Med. 1998; 30: 441445.
  • 3
    Michielutte R, Sharp PC, Foley KL, et al. Intervention to increase screening mammography among women 65 and older. Health Educ Res. 2005; 20: 149162.
  • 4
    Cleghorn GD, Nguyen M, Roberts B, Duran G, Tellez T, Alecon M. Practice-based interventions to improve health care for Latinos with diabetes. Ethn Dis. 2004; 14(3 suppl 1 ): S117S121.
  • 5
    Mehler PS, Krantz MJ, Lundgren RA, et al. Bridging the quality gap in diabetic hyperlipidemia: a practice-based intervention. Am J Med. 2005; 118: 1414.
  • 6
    Cooper GS, Yuan Z, Stange KC, Dennis LK, Amini SB, Rimm AA. The sensitivity of Medicare claims data for case ascertainment of six common cancers. Med Care. 1999; 37: 436444.
  • 7
    Koroukian SM, Cooper GS, Rimm AA. Ability of Medicaid claims data to identify incident cases of breast cancer in the Ohio Medicaid population. Health Serv Res. 2003; 38: 947960.
  • 8
    Arndt V, Sturmer T, Stegmaier C, Ziegler H, Dhom G, Brenner H. Patient delay and stage of diagnosis among breast cancer patients in Germany–a population based study. Br J Cancer. 2002; 86: 10341040.
  • 9
    Kothari A, Fentiman IS. Diagnostic delays in breast cancer and impact on survival. Int J Clin Pract. 2003; 57: 200203.
  • 10
    Richards MA, Westcombe AM, Love SB, Littlejohns P, Ramirez AJ. Influence of delay on survival in patients with breast cancer: a systematic review. Lancet. 1999; 353: 11191126.
  • 11
    Haas JS, Cook EF, Puopolo AL, Burstin HR, Brennan TA. Differences in the quality of care for women with an abnormal mammogram or breast complaint. J Gen Intern Med. 2000; 15: 321328.
  • 12
    Strzelczyk JJ, Dignan MB. Disparities in adherence to recommended followup on screening mammography: interaction of sociodemographic factors. Ethn Dis. 2002; 12: 7786.
  • 13
    Kopans D, D'Orsi C, Adler D. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 1998.
  • 14
    Eberl MM, Fox CH, Edge SB, Carter CA, Mahoney MC. BI-RADS classification for management of abnormal mammograms. J Am Board Fam Med. 2006; 19: 161164.
  • 15
    Poplack SP, Tosteson AN, Grove MR, Wells WA, Carney PA. Mammography in 53,803 women from the New Hampshire mammography network. Radiology. 2000; 217: 832840.
  • 16
    Dresser MV, Feingold L, Rosenkranz SL, Coltin KL. Clinical quality measurement. Comparing chart review and automated methodologies. Med Care. 1997; 35: 539552.
  • 17
    Butler Nattinger A, Schapira MM, Warren JL, Earle CC. Methodological issues in the use of administrative claims data to study surveillance after cancer treatment. Med Care. 2002; 40(8 suppl ): IV-69IV-74.
  • 18
    Penberthy L, McClish D, Manning C, Retchin S, Smith T. The added value of claims for cancer surveillance: results of varying case definitions. Med Care. 2005; 43: 705712.
  • 19
    Roos LL, Walld R, Wajda A, Bond R, Hartford K. Record linkage strategies, outpatient procedures, and administrative data. Med Care. 1996; 34: 570582.
  • 20
    Monsees BS. The Mammography Quality Standards Act. An overview of the regulations and guidance. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000; 38: 759772.
  • 21
    Henry RA, Stanton MP. Case management process improvement protocol: transcribing an initial summary for the oncology geriatric patient in a rural satellite office. Lippincotts Case Manag. 2005; 10: 234239.
  • 22
    Butler WM, Cunningham JE, Bull D, et al. Breast cancer care: changing community standards. J Healthc Qual. 2004; 26: 2228.
  • 23
    Delaronde S. Using case management to increase antiinflammatory medication use among a managed care population with asthma. J Asthma. 2002; 39: 5563.
  • 24
    Martin DC, Berger ML, Anstatt DT, et al. A randomized controlled open trial of population-based disease and case management in a Medicare Plus Choice health maintenance organization. Prev Chronic Dis. 2004; 1: A05.
  • 25
    Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council of the National Academies. Assessing the Quality of Cancer Care: An Approach to Measurement in Georgia. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council of the National Academies; 2005.