These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11724039)

  • 1. Improving the detection of simulated masses in mammograms through two different image-processing techniques.
    Hemminger BM; Zong S; Muller KE; Coffey CS; DeLuca MC; Johnston RE; Pisano ED
    Acad Radiol; 2001 Sep; 8(9):845-55. PubMed ID: 11724039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effect of intensity windowing on the detection of simulated masses embedded in dense portions of digitized mammograms in a laboratory setting.
    Pisano ED; Chandramouli J; Hemminger BM; Glueck D; Johnston RE; Muller K; Braeuning MP; Puff D; Garrett W; Pizer S
    J Digit Imaging; 1997 Nov; 10(4):174-82. PubMed ID: 9399171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization image processing to improve the detection of simulated spiculations in dense mammograms.
    Pisano ED; Zong S; Hemminger BM; DeLuca M; Johnston RE; Muller K; Braeuning MP; Pizer SM
    J Digit Imaging; 1998 Nov; 11(4):193-200. PubMed ID: 9848052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Does intensity windowing improve the detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms?
    Pisano ED; Chandramouli J; Hemminger BM; DeLuca M; Glueck D; Johnston RE; Muller K; Braeuning MP; Pizer S
    J Digit Imaging; 1997 May; 10(2):79-84. PubMed ID: 9165422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of display luminance on the feature detection rates of masses in mammograms.
    Hemminger BM; Dillon AW; Johnston RE; Muller KE; Deluca MC; Coffey CS; Pisano ED
    Med Phys; 1999 Nov; 26(11):2266-72. PubMed ID: 10587207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiologists' preferences for digital mammographic display. The International Digital Mammography Development Group.
    Pisano ED; Cole EB; Major S; Zong S; Hemminger BM; Muller KE; Johnston RE; Walsh R; Conant E; Fajardo LL; Feig SA; Nishikawa RM; Yaffe MJ; Williams MB; Aylward SR
    Radiology; 2000 Sep; 216(3):820-30. PubMed ID: 10966717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
    Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Utility of adaptive control processing for the interpretation of digital mammograms.
    Jinnouchi M; Yabuuchi H; Kubo M; Tokunaga E; Yamamoto H; Honda H
    Acta Radiol; 2016 Nov; 57(11):1297-1303. PubMed ID: 25995309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A method to test the reproducibility and to improve performance of computer-aided detection schemes for digitized mammograms.
    Zheng B; Gur D; Good WF; Hardesty LA
    Med Phys; 2004 Nov; 31(11):2964-72. PubMed ID: 15587648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Enhancement of Mammographic Images Using Histogram-Based Techniques for Their Classification Using CNN.
    Alshamrani K; Alshamrani HA; Alqahtani FF; Almutairi BS
    Sensors (Basel); 2022 Dec; 23(1):. PubMed ID: 36616832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparing the performance of mammographic enhancement algorithms: a preference study.
    Sivaramakrishna R; Obuchowski NA; Chilcote WA; Cardenosa G; Powell KA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2000 Jul; 175(1):45-51. PubMed ID: 10882244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Detection of breast cancer by soft-copy reading of digital mammograms: comparison between a routine image-processing parameter and high-contrast parameters.
    Kamitani T; Yabuuchi H; Soeda H; Matsuo Y; Okafuji T; Sakai S; Setoguchi T; Hatakenaka M; Ishii N; Honda H
    Acta Radiol; 2010 Feb; 51(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 19922328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mammographic density and cancer detection: does digital imaging challenge our current understanding?
    Al Mousa DS; Mello-Thoms C; Ryan EA; Lee WB; Pietrzyk MW; Reed WM; Heard R; Poulos A; Tan J; Li Y; Brennan PC
    Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1377-85. PubMed ID: 25097013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A computational model to generate simulated three-dimensional breast masses.
    de Sisternes L; Brankov JG; Zysk AM; Schmidt RA; Nishikawa RM; Wernick MN
    Med Phys; 2015 Feb; 42(2):1098-118. PubMed ID: 25652522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of enhancement methods for mammograms with performance measures.
    Kurt B; Nabiyev VV; Turhan K
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2014; 205():486-90. PubMed ID: 25160232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Breast calcification and mass detection with mammographic anode-filter combinations of molybdenum, tungsten, and rhodium.
    Kimme-Smith CM; Sayre JW; McCombs MM; DeBruhl ND; Bassett LW
    Radiology; 1997 Jun; 203(3):679-83. PubMed ID: 9169688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Computerized nipple identification for multiple image analysis in computer-aided diagnosis.
    Zhou C; Chan HP; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Petrick N
    Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2871-82. PubMed ID: 15543797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A segmentation technique to detect masses in dense breast digitized mammograms.
    Santos VT; Schiabel H; Góes CE; Benatti RH
    J Digit Imaging; 2002; 15 Suppl 1():210-3. PubMed ID: 12105730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A method for determination of optimal image enhancement for the detection of mammographic abnormalities.
    Puff DT; Pisano ED; Muller KE; Johnston RE; Hemminger BM; Burbeck CA; McLelland R; Pizer SM
    J Digit Imaging; 1994 Nov; 7(4):161-71. PubMed ID: 7858011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Computer-aided diagnosis of masses with full-field digital mammography.
    Li L; Clark RA; Thomas JA
    Acad Radiol; 2002 Jan; 9(1):4-12. PubMed ID: 11918357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.