132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12449359)
21. Adaptive designs in multi-reader multi-case clinical trials of imaging devices.
Huang Z; Samuelson F; Tcheuko L; Chen W
Stat Methods Med Res; 2020 Jun; 29(6):1592-1611. PubMed ID: 31456480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. An observer study for a computer-aided reading protocol (CARP) in the screening environment for digital mammography.
Moin P; Deshpande R; Sayre J; Messer E; Gupte S; Romsdahl H; Hasegawa A; Liu BJ
Acad Radiol; 2011 Nov; 18(11):1420-9. PubMed ID: 21971259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Using computer-extracted image features for modeling of error-making patterns in detection of mammographic masses among radiology residents.
Zhang J; Lo JY; Kuzmiak CM; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Mazurowski MA
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091907. PubMed ID: 25186394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [New methods of information technology for designing ultrasound diagnostic devices].
Trukhanov AI; Kudriavtsev PS
Med Tekh; 1994; (3):14-6. PubMed ID: 7934725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Multireader Diagnostic Accuracy Imaging Studies: Fundamentals of Design and Analysis.
Obuchowski NA; Bullen J
Radiology; 2022 Apr; 303(1):26-34. PubMed ID: 35166584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Empiric assessment of parameters that affect the design of multireader receiver operating characteristic studies.
Rockette HE; Campbell WL; Britton CA; Holbert JM; King JL; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 1999 Dec; 6(12):723-9. PubMed ID: 10887893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. One-shot estimate of MRMC variance: AUC.
Gallas BD
Acad Radiol; 2006 Mar; 13(3):353-62. PubMed ID: 16488848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. From medical invention to clinical practice: the reimbursement challenge facing new device procedures and technology--part 1: issues in medical device assessment.
Raab GG; Parr DH
J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Sep; 3(9):694-702. PubMed ID: 17412151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Advances in imaging of the solitary pulmonary nodule.
Ooi GC; Khong PL; Yau YY
Hong Kong Med J; 2004 Apr; 10(2):107-16. PubMed ID: 15075431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Receiver operating characteristic analysis: a tool for the quantitative evaluation of observer performance and imaging systems.
Metz CE
J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Jun; 3(6):413-22. PubMed ID: 17412096
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. A marginal model approach for analysis of multi-reader multi-test receiver operating characteristic (ROC) data.
Song X; Zhou XH
Biostatistics; 2005 Apr; 6(2):303-12. PubMed ID: 15772108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Full-field digital mammography.
TEC Bull (Online); 2002 Apr; 19(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 12166454
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--observer performance study.
Skaane P; Balleyguier C; Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Piguet JC; Young K; Niklason LT
Radiology; 2005 Oct; 237(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 16100086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Analysis of uncertainties in estimates of components of variance in multivariate ROC analysis.
Beiden SV; Wagner RF; Campbell G; Chan HP
Acad Radiol; 2001 Jul; 8(7):616-22. PubMed ID: 11450962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Computer-aided diagnosis of pulmonary nodules on CT scans: segmentation and classification using 3D active contours.
Way TW; Hadjiiski LM; Sahiner B; Chan HP; Cascade PN; Kazerooni EA; Bogot N; Zhou C
Med Phys; 2006 Jul; 33(7):2323-37. PubMed ID: 16898434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Health technology assessment for radiologists: basic principles and evaluation framework.
Lim ME; O'Reilly D; Tarride JE; Burke N; Ferrusi IL; Campbell K; Goeree R
J Am Coll Radiol; 2009 May; 6(5):299-306. PubMed ID: 19394570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. The prediction of breast cancer biopsy outcomes using two CAD approaches that both emphasize an intelligible decision process.
Elter M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Wittenberg T
Med Phys; 2007 Nov; 34(11):4164-72. PubMed ID: 18072480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Improving digital breast tomosynthesis reading time: A pilot multi-reader, multi-case study using concurrent Computer-Aided Detection (CAD).
Balleyguier C; Arfi-Rouche J; Levy L; Toubiana PR; Cohen-Scali F; Toledano AY; Boyer B
Eur J Radiol; 2017 Dec; 97():83-89. PubMed ID: 29153373
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Two-view and single-view tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: high-resolution X-ray imaging observer study.
Wallis MG; Moa E; Zanca F; Leifland K; Danielsson M
Radiology; 2012 Mar; 262(3):788-96. PubMed ID: 22274840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Study design in the evaluation of breast cancer imaging technologies.
Houn F; Bright RA; Bushar HF; Croft BY; Finder CA; Gohagan JK; Jennings RJ; Keegan P; Kessler LG; Kramer BS; Martynec LO; Robinowitz M; Sacks WM; Schultz DG; Wagner RF
Acad Radiol; 2000 Sep; 7(9):684-92. PubMed ID: 10987329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
