1238 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16100086)
1. 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]
2. Follow-up and final results of the Oslo I Study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading.
Skaane P; Skjennald A; Young K; Egge E; Jebsen I; Sager EM; Scheel B; Søvik E; Ertzaas AK; Hofvind S; Abdelnoor M
Acta Radiol; 2005 Nov; 46(7):679-89. PubMed ID: 16372686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--Oslo I study.
Skaane P; Young K; Skjennald A
Radiology; 2003 Dec; 229(3):877-84. PubMed ID: 14576447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of radiologist performance with photon-counting full-field digital mammography to conventional full-field digital mammography.
Cole EB; Toledano AY; Lundqvist M; Pisano ED
Acad Radiol; 2012 Aug; 19(8):916-22. PubMed ID: 22537503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and final results of Oslo II study.
Skaane P; Hofvind S; Skjennald A
Radiology; 2007 Sep; 244(3):708-17. PubMed ID: 17709826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Detection and classification of calcifications on digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography: a comparison.
Spangler ML; Zuley ML; Sumkin JH; Abrams G; Ganott MA; Hakim C; Perrin R; Chough DM; Shah R; Gur D
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Feb; 196(2):320-4. PubMed ID: 21257882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Diagnostic accuracy of Fischer Senoscan Digital Mammography versus screen-film mammography in a diagnostic mammography population.
Cole E; Pisano ED; Brown M; Kuzmiak C; Braeuning MP; Kim HH; Jong R; Walsh R
Acad Radiol; 2004 Aug; 11(8):879-86. PubMed ID: 15288038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer.
Lewin JM; D'Orsi CJ; Hendrick RE; Moss LJ; Isaacs PK; Karellas A; Cutter GR
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Sep; 179(3):671-7. PubMed ID: 12185042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [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]
11. Interpretation of digital mammograms: comparison of speed and accuracy of soft-copy versus printed-film display.
Pisano ED; Cole EB; Kistner EO; Muller KE; Hemminger BM; Brown ML; Johnston RE; Kuzmiak CM; Braeuning MP; Freimanis RI; Soo MS; Baker JA; Walsh R
Radiology; 2002 May; 223(2):483-8. PubMed ID: 11997557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Observer variability in screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading.
Skaane P; Diekmann F; Balleyguier C; Diekmann S; Piguet JC; Young K; Abdelnoor M; Niklason L
Eur Radiol; 2008 Jun; 18(6):1134-43. PubMed ID: 18301902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of the accuracy of film-screen mammography, full-field digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Michell MJ; Iqbal A; Wasan RK; Evans DR; Peacock C; Lawinski CP; Douiri A; Wilson R; Whelehan P
Clin Radiol; 2012 Oct; 67(10):976-81. PubMed ID: 22625656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection and characterization of simulated small masses.
Yang WT; Lai CJ; Whitman GJ; Murphy WA; Dryden MJ; Kushwaha AC; Sahin AA; Johnston D; Dempsey PJ; Shaw CC
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Dec; 187(6):W576-81. PubMed ID: 17114508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program--the Oslo II Study.
Skaane P; Skjennald A
Radiology; 2004 Jul; 232(1):197-204. PubMed ID: 15155893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Conventional versus digital mammography in the analysis of screen-detected lesions with low positive predictive value.
Bonardi R; Ambrogetti D; Ciatto S; Gentile E; Lazzari B; Mantellini P; Nannelli E; Ristori E; Sottani L; Turco MR
Eur J Radiol; 2005 Aug; 55(2):258-63. PubMed ID: 16036157
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to contrast and spatial resolution in tissue equivalent breast phantoms.
Kuzmiak CM; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Zeng D; Burns CB; Roberto C; Pavic D; Lee Y; Seo BK; Koomen M; Washburn D
Med Phys; 2005 Oct; 32(10):3144-50. PubMed ID: 16279068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
