108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15560719)
1. Quantitative assessment of percent breast density: analog versus digital acquisition.
Harvey JA
Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2004 Dec; 3(6):611-6. PubMed ID: 15560719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Estimation of breast percent density in raw and processed full field digital mammography images via adaptive fuzzy c-means clustering and support vector machine segmentation.
Keller BM; Nathan DL; Wang Y; Zheng Y; Gee JC; Conant EF; Kontos D
Med Phys; 2012 Aug; 39(8):4903-17. PubMed ID: 22894417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Full-field digital mammographic interpretation with prior analog versus prior digitized analog mammography: time for interpretation.
Garg AS; Rapelyea JA; Rechtman LR; Torrente J; Bittner RB; Coffey CM; Brem RF
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jun; 196(6):1436-8. PubMed ID: 21606310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [ROC analysis comparing screen film mammography and digital mammography].
Gaspard-Bakhach S; Dilhuydy MH; Bonichon F; Barreau B; Henriques C; Maugey-Laulom B
J Radiol; 2000 Feb; 81(2):133-9. PubMed ID: 10705143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Mammographic density assessed on paired raw and processed digital images and on paired screen-film and digital images across three mammography systems.
Burton A; Byrnes G; Stone J; Tamimi RM; Heine J; Vachon C; Ozmen V; Pereira A; Garmendia ML; Scott C; Hipwell JH; Dickens C; Schüz J; Aribal ME; Bertrand K; Kwong A; Giles GG; Hopper J; Pérez Gómez B; Pollán M; Teo SH; Mariapun S; Taib NA; Lajous M; Lopez-Riduara R; Rice M; Romieu I; Flugelman AA; Ursin G; Qureshi S; Ma H; Lee E; Sirous R; Sirous M; Lee JW; Kim J; Salem D; Kamal R; Hartman M; Miao H; Chia KS; Nagata C; Vinayak S; Ndumia R; van Gils CH; Wanders JO; Peplonska B; Bukowska A; Allen S; Vinnicombe S; Moss S; Chiarelli AM; Linton L; Maskarinec G; Yaffe MJ; Boyd NF; Dos-Santos-Silva I; McCormack VA
Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Dec; 18(1):130. PubMed ID: 27993168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Impact of the transition from screen-film to digital screening mammography on interval cancer characteristics and treatment - a population based study from the Netherlands.
Nederend J; Duijm LE; Louwman MW; Coebergh JW; Roumen RM; Lohle PN; Roukema JA; Rutten MJ; van Steenbergen LN; Ernst MF; Jansen FH; Plaisier ML; Hooijen MJ; Voogd AC
Eur J Cancer; 2014 Jan; 50(1):31-9. PubMed ID: 24275518
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Image quality of digital direct flat-panel mammography versus an analog screen-film technique using a low-contrast phantom.
Krug KB; Stützer H; Schröder R; Boecker J; Poggenborg J; Lackner K
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Sep; 191(3):W80-8. PubMed ID: 18716083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.
Pisano ED; Gatsonis C; Hendrick E; Yaffe M; Baum JK; Acharyya S; Conant EF; Fajardo LL; Bassett L; D'Orsi C; Jong R; Rebner M;
N Engl J Med; 2005 Oct; 353(17):1773-83. PubMed ID: 16169887
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms.
Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Stapleton S; Young K; Castellino RA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):377-84. PubMed ID: 17242245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Comparison of calcification specificity in digital mammography using soft-copy display versus screen-film mammography.
Kim HH; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Jiroutek MR; Muller KE; Zheng Y; Kuzmiak CM; Koomen MA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Jul; 187(1):47-50. PubMed ID: 16794154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Gray-scale and geometric registration of full-field digital and film-screen mammograms.
Snoeren PR; Karssemeijer N
Med Image Anal; 2007 Apr; 11(2):146-56. PubMed ID: 17208511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The adverse implications of the transition from film to digital mammography for performing surveillance in patients with a history of breast cancer or significant risk factors for the disease.
Ward RL; Speakman D; Henderson MA
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol; 2011 Dec; 7(4):364-8. PubMed ID: 22151986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial: objectives and methodology.
Pisano ED; Gatsonis CA; Yaffe MJ; Hendrick RE; Tosteson AN; Fryback DG; Bassett LW; Baum JK; Conant EF; Jong RA; Rebner M; D'Orsi CJ
Radiology; 2005 Aug; 236(2):404-12. PubMed ID: 15961755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reduction in false-positive results after introduction of digital mammography: analysis from four population-based breast cancer screening programs in Spain.
Sala M; Salas D; Belvis F; Sánchez M; Ferrer J; Ibañez J; Román R; Ferrer F; Vega A; Laso MS; Castells X
Radiology; 2011 Feb; 258(2):388-95. PubMed ID: 21273520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. [Efficacy of storage phosphor-based digital mammography in diagnosis of breast cancer--comparison with film-screen mammography].
Kitahama H
Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1991 May; 51(5):547-60. PubMed ID: 1651472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quantitative assessment of breast density from digitized mammograms into Tabar's patterns.
Jamal N; Ng KH; Looi LM; McLean D; Zulfiqar A; Tan SP; Liew WF; Shantini A; Ranganathan S
Phys Med Biol; 2006 Nov; 51(22):5843-57. PubMed ID: 17068368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Density correction of peripheral breast tissue on digital mammograms.
Bick U; Giger ML; Schmidt RA; Nishikawa RM; Doi K
Radiographics; 1996 Nov; 16(6):1403-11. PubMed ID: 8946544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Kim WH; Chang JM; Koo HR; Seo M; Bae MS; Lee J; Moon WK
Acta Radiol; 2017 Feb; 58(2):148-155. PubMed ID: 27178032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
