Harvard Catalyst Profiles

Contact, publication, and social network information about Harvard faculty and fellows.

Larissa Nekhlyudov, M.D.

Co-Author

This page shows the publications co-authored by Larissa Nekhlyudov and Suzanne Fletcher.
Connection Strength

3.203
  1. Ten-year risk of diagnostic mammograms and invasive breast procedures after breast-conserving surgery for DCIS. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012 Apr 18; 104(8):614-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.498
  2. Adherence to long-term surveillance mammography among women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jul 01; 27(19):3211-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.407
  3. Informed decision making before initiating screening mammography: does it occur and does it make a difference? Health Expect. 2008 Dec; 11(4):366-75.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.395
  4. Information and involvement preferences of women in their 40s before their first screening mammogram. Arch Intern Med. 2005 Jun 27; 165(12):1370-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.312
  5. Beliefs and expectations of women under 50 years old regarding screening mammography: a qualitative study. J Gen Intern Med. 2003 Mar; 18(3):182-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.265
  6. Breast self-examination: who teaches it, who is taught, and how often? (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2002 May; 13(4):343-51.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.250
  7. Is it time to stop teaching breast self-examination? CMAJ. 2001 Jun 26; 164(13):1851-2.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.236
  8. Risk Prediction for Local Breast Cancer Recurrence Among Women with DCIS Treated in a Community Practice: A Nested, Case-Control Study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015 Dec; 22 Suppl 3:S502-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.155
  9. Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011. JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Jan; 174(1):114-21.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.141
  10. What women wish they knew before prophylactic mastectomy. Cancer Nurs. 2007 Jul-Aug; 30(4):285-91; quiz 292-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.090
  11. Contentment with quality of life among breast cancer survivors with and without contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2006 Mar 20; 24(9):1350-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.082
  12. Impact of IRB requirements on a multicenter survey of prophylactic mastectomy outcomes. Ann Epidemiol. 2006 Apr; 16(4):275-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.078
  13. Women's decision-making roles regarding contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005; (35):55-60.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.075
  14. Risk factors for non-invasive and invasive local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013 Jun; 139(2):453-60.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  15. Treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ among patients cared for in large integrated health plans. Am J Manag Care. 2010 May; 16(5):351-60.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  16. Relationship between clinical and pathologic features of ductal carcinoma in situ and patient age: an analysis of 657 patients. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009 Dec; 33(12):1802-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  17. Declining recurrence among ductal carcinoma in situ patients treated with breast-conserving surgery in the community setting. Breast Cancer Res. 2009; 11(6):R85.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  18. Positive, negative, and disparate--women's differing long-term psychosocial experiences of bilateral or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Breast J. 2008 Jan-Feb; 14(1):25-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  19. Clinical and pathologic features of ductal carcinoma in situ associated with the presence of flat epithelial atypia: an analysis of 543 patients. Mod Pathol. 2007 Nov; 20(11):1149-55.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  20. Quality of life after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Feb; 14(2):686-94.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.021
  21. Complications following bilateral prophylactic mastectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005; (35):61-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  22. Race and ethnicity: comparing medical records to self-reports. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005; (35):72-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
Connection Strength
The connection strength for co-authors is the sum of the scores for each of their shared publications.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.
Funded by the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences through its Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program, grant number UL1TR002541.