<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>journalClub &#187; imaging</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.journalclub.org/categories/medical/imaging/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.journalclub.org</link>
	<description>Comments on the medical literature</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 17:01:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Multidetector spiral CT for PE</title>
		<link>http://www.journalclub.org/2005/05/03/n59</link>
		<comments>http://www.journalclub.org/2005/05/03/n59#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2005 17:51:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mjmd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cardiovascular]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imaging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[medical]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.journalclub.org/2005/04/28/n59</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week&#8217;s NEJM has an article, from Switzerland and France, on multidetector-row computed tomography in suspected pulmonary embolism. Rationale The authors state that first-generation, single-detector, spiral CT scanning is quite specific (90%) but not very sensitive (70%) for detecting pulmonary emboli. In two previous studies by their group, negative CT scans were contradicted by positive [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.journalclub.org/2005/05/03/n59/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MRI for breast imaging</title>
		<link>http://www.journalclub.org/2004/12/15/n38</link>
		<comments>http://www.journalclub.org/2004/12/15/n38#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2004 01:41:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>mjmd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[imaging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oncology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.journalclub.org/2004/12/15/n38</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week&#8217;s JAMA had an article on magnetic resonance imaging of the breast prior to biopsy, which evaluated the performance of MRI imaging in evaluating patients with breast abnormalities. This study found that MRI had good sensitivity but only moderate specificity for detecting cancer. The negative predictive value of MRI was only about 85%, not [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.journalclub.org/2004/12/15/n38/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

