160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15717938)
1. Impact of computer-aided detection prompts on the sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography.
Taylor P; Champness J; Given-Wilson R; Johnston K; Potts H
Health Technol Assess; 2005 Feb; 9(6):iii, 1-58. PubMed ID: 15717938
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. An evaluation of the impact of computer-based prompts on screen readers' interpretation of mammograms.
Taylor PM; Champness J; Given-Wilson RM; Potts HW; Johnston K
Br J Radiol; 2004 Jan; 77(913):21-7. PubMed ID: 14988134
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Computer-aided detection in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Programme: prospective study.
Khoo LA; Taylor P; Given-Wilson RM
Radiology; 2005 Nov; 237(2):444-9. PubMed ID: 16244252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Assessing the impact of CAD on the sensitivity and specificity of film readers.
Taylor P; Given-Wilson R; Champness J; Potts HW; Johnston K
Clin Radiol; 2004 Dec; 59(12):1099-105. PubMed ID: 15556592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Invasive breast cancers detected by screening mammography: a detailed comparison of computer-aided detection-assisted single reading and double reading.
Cawson JN; Nickson C; Amos A; Hill G; Whan AB; Kavanagh AM
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2009 Oct; 53(5):442-9. PubMed ID: 19788479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of computer-aided detection (CAD) devices.
Taylor P; Given-Wilson RM
Br J Radiol; 2005; 78 Spec No 1():S26-30. PubMed ID: 15917442
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Variable size computer-aided detection prompts and mammography film reader decisions.
Gilbert FJ; Astley SM; Boggis CR; McGee MA; Griffiths PM; Duffy SW; Agbaje OF; Gillan MG; Wilson M; Jain AK; Barr N; Beetles UM; Griffiths MA; Johnson J; Roberts RM; Deans HE; Duncan KA; Iyengar G
Breast Cancer Res; 2008; 10(4):R72. PubMed ID: 18724867
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience.
Destounis SV; DiNitto P; Logan-Young W; Bonaccio E; Zuley ML; Willison KM
Radiology; 2004 Aug; 232(2):578-84. PubMed ID: 15229350
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Improved Cancer Detection Using Artificial Intelligence: a Retrospective Evaluation of Missed Cancers on Mammography.
Watanabe AT; Lim V; Vu HX; Chim R; Weise E; Liu J; Bradley WG; Comstock CE
J Digit Imaging; 2019 Aug; 32(4):625-637. PubMed ID: 31011956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Effects of incorrect computer-aided detection (CAD) output on human decision-making in mammography.
Alberdi E; Povykalo A; Strigini L; Ayton P
Acad Radiol; 2004 Aug; 11(8):909-18. PubMed ID: 15354301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reproducibility of prompts in computer-aided detection (CAD) of breast cancer.
Taylor CG; Champness J; Reddy M; Taylor P; Potts HW; Given-Wilson R
Clin Radiol; 2003 Sep; 58(9):733-8. PubMed ID: 12943648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection.
Lehman CD; Wellman RD; Buist DS; Kerlikowske K; Tosteson AN; Miglioretti DL;
JAMA Intern Med; 2015 Nov; 175(11):1828-37. PubMed ID: 26414882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Application of a computer-aided detection (CAD) system to digitalized mammograms for identifying microcalcifications].
Bazzocchi M; Facecchia I; Zuiani C; Londero V; Smania S; Bottigli U; Delogu P
Radiol Med; 2001 May; 101(5):334-40. PubMed ID: 11438784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Mammography screening using independent double reading with consensus: is there a potential benefit for computer-aided detection?
Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Hofvind S; Jahr G; Castellino RA
Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):241-8. PubMed ID: 22287148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Computer-aided detection of masses at mammography: interactive decision support versus prompts.
Hupse R; Samulski M; Lobbes MB; Mann RM; Mus R; den Heeten GJ; Beijerinck D; Pijnappel RM; Boetes C; Karssemeijer N
Radiology; 2013 Jan; 266(1):123-9. PubMed ID: 23091171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Mammographic features of breast cancers at single reading with computer-aided detection and at double reading in a large multicenter prospective trial of computer-aided detection: CADET II.
James JJ; Gilbert FJ; Wallis MG; Gillan MG; Astley SM; Boggis CR; Agbaje OF; Brentnall AR; Duffy SW
Radiology; 2010 Aug; 256(2):379-86. PubMed ID: 20656831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. How to discriminate between computer-aided and computer-hindered decisions: a case study in mammography.
Povyakalo AA; Alberdi E; Strigini L; Ayton P
Med Decis Making; 2013 Jan; 33(1):98-107. PubMed ID: 23300205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography.
Ko JM; Nicholas MJ; Mendel JB; Slanetz PJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Dec; 187(6):1483-91. PubMed ID: 17114541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Can radiographers read screening mammograms?
Wivell G; Denton ER; Eve CB; Inglis JC; Harvey I
Clin Radiol; 2003 Jan; 58(1):63-7. PubMed ID: 12565207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
