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.
152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14736686)
1. A probabilistic expert system that provides automated mammographic-histologic correlation: initial experience. Burnside ES; Rubin DL; Shachter RD; Sohlich RE; Sickles EA AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 Feb; 182(2):481-8. PubMed ID: 14736686 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Bayesian network to predict breast cancer risk of mammographic microcalcifications and reduce number of benign biopsy results: initial experience. Burnside ES; Rubin DL; Fine JP; Shachter RD; Sisney GA; Leung WK Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):666-73. PubMed ID: 16926323 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A Bayesian network for mammography. Burnside E; Rubin D; Shachter R Proc AMIA Symp; 2000; ():106-10. PubMed ID: 11079854 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Stereotactic Mammotome breast biopsy: routine clinical experience and correlation with BI-RADS--classification and histopathology]. Michel SC; Löw R; Singer G; Otto R; Hohl M; Kubik RA Praxis (Bern 1994); 2007 Sep; 96(39):1459-74. PubMed ID: 17966279 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The breast imaging reporting and data system: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. Liberman L; Abramson AF; Squires FB; Glassman JR; Morris EA; Dershaw DD AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Jul; 171(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 9648759 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Computer-aided classification of BI-RADS category 3 breast lesions. Buchbinder SS; Leichter IS; Lederman RB; Novak B; Bamberger PN; Sklair-Levy M; Yarmish G; Fields SI Radiology; 2004 Mar; 230(3):820-3. PubMed ID: 14739315 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect on biopsy technique of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) for nonpalpable mammographic abnormalities. Ball CG; Butchart M; MacFarlane JK Can J Surg; 2002 Aug; 45(4):259-63. PubMed ID: 12174979 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Is stereotactic large-core needle biopsy beneficial prior to surgical treatment in BI-RADS 5 lesions? Hoorntje LE; Peeters PH; Mali WP; Borel Rinkes IH Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2004 Jul; 86(2):165-70. PubMed ID: 15319568 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description. Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Floyd CE AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Apr; 166(4):773-8. PubMed ID: 8610547 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Probabilistic computer model developed from clinical data in national mammography database format to classify mammographic findings. Burnside ES; Davis J; Chhatwal J; Alagoz O; Lindstrom MJ; Geller BM; Littenberg B; Shaffer KA; Kahn CE; Page CD Radiology; 2009 Jun; 251(3):663-72. PubMed ID: 19366902 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value. Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions. Varas X; Leborgne JH; Leborgne F; Mezzera J; Jaumandreu S; Leborgne F AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Sep; 179(3):691-5. PubMed ID: 12185047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using a Bayesian network to predict the probability and type of breast cancer represented by microcalcifications on mammography. Burnside ES; Rubin DL; Shachter RD Stud Health Technol Inform; 2004; 107(Pt 1):13-7. PubMed ID: 15360765 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Identifying error-making patterns in assessment of mammographic BI-RADS descriptors among radiology residents using statistical pattern recognition. Mazurowski MA; Barnhart HX; Baker JA; Tourassi GD Acad Radiol; 2012 Jul; 19(7):865-71. PubMed ID: 22459643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Positive predictive value of breast cancer in the lesions categorized as BI-RADS category 5. Wiratkapun C; Lertsithichai P; Wibulpholprasert B J Med Assoc Thai; 2006 Aug; 89(8):1253-9. PubMed ID: 17048437 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Artificial neural network: improving the quality of breast biopsy recommendations. Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Lo JY; Floyd CE Radiology; 1996 Jan; 198(1):131-5. PubMed ID: 8539365 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Mammographic surveillance after MammoSite breast brachytherapy: analysis of architectural patterns and additional interventions. Dragun AE; Jenrette JM; Ackerman SJ; Irshad A; Pope TL Am J Clin Oncol; 2007 Dec; 30(6):574-9. PubMed ID: 18091050 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. BI-RADS categorization as a predictor of malignancy. Orel SG; Kay N; Reynolds C; Sullivan DC Radiology; 1999 Jun; 211(3):845-50. PubMed ID: 10352614 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: comparison with radiologists' estimates and BI-RADS categories. Martin KE; Helvie MA; Zhou C; Roubidoux MA; Bailey JE; Paramagul C; Blane CE; Klein KA; Sonnad SS; Chan HP Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):656-65. PubMed ID: 16857974 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]