132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16236517)
1. Computer-aided detection (CAD) of cancers detected on double reading by one reader only.
Ciatto S; Ambrogetti D; Collini G; Cruciani A; Ercolini E; Risso G; Rosselli Del Turco M
Breast; 2006 Aug; 15(4):528-32. PubMed ID: 16236517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of two commercial systems for computer-assisted detection (CAD) as an aid to interpreting screening mammograms.
Ciatto S; Ambrogetti D; Bonardi R; Brancato B; Catarzi S; Risso G; Rosselli Del Turco M
Radiol Med; 2004; 107(5-6):480-8. PubMed ID: 15195010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Computer-aided diagnosis with temporal analysis to improve radiologists' interpretation of mammographic mass lesions.
Timp S; Varela C; Karssemeijer N
IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed; 2010 May; 14(3):803-8. PubMed ID: 20403792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme.
Ciatto S; Ambrogetti D; Bonardi R; Catarzi S; Risso G; Rosselli Del Turco M; Mantellini P
J Med Screen; 2005; 12(2):103-6. PubMed ID: 15949122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. The role of arbitration of discordant reports at double reading of screening mammograms.
Ciatto S; Ambrogetti D; Risso G; Catarzi S; Morrone D; Mantellini P; Rosselli Del Turco M
J Med Screen; 2005; 12(3):125-7. PubMed ID: 16156942
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of computer-aided detection to double reading of screening mammograms: review of 231,221 mammograms.
Gromet M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Apr; 190(4):854-9. PubMed ID: 18356428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography.
Gilbert FJ; Astley SM; Gillan MG; Agbaje OF; Wallis MG; James J; Boggis CR; Duffy SW;
N Engl J Med; 2008 Oct; 359(16):1675-84. PubMed ID: 18832239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Evaluation of the potential benefit of computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for lung cancer screenings using photofluorography: analysis of an observer study].
Matsumoto T; Doi K; Kano A; Nakamura H; Nakanishi T
Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1993 Oct; 53(10):1195-207. PubMed ID: 8255750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Blinded comparison of computer-aided detection with human second reading in screening mammography.
Georgian-Smith D; Moore RH; Halpern E; Yeh ED; Rafferty EA; D'Alessandro HA; Staffa M; Hall DA; McCarthy KA; Kopans DB
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Nov; 189(5):1135-41. PubMed ID: 17954651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Current status and future directions of computer-aided diagnosis in mammography.
Nishikawa RM
Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2007; 31(4-5):224-35. PubMed ID: 17386998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms.
Karssemeijer N; Otten JD; Verbeek AL; Groenewoud JH; de Koning HJ; Hendriks JH; Holland R
Radiology; 2003 Apr; 227(1):192-200. PubMed ID: 12616008
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. CAD-aided mammogram training.
Luo P; Qian W; Romilly P
Acad Radiol; 2005 Aug; 12(8):1039-48. PubMed ID: 16087097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection: pilot clinical trial.
Helvie MA; Hadjiiski L; Makariou E; Chan HP; Petrick N; Sahiner B; Lo SC; Freedman M; Adler D; Bailey J; Blane C; Hoff D; Hunt K; Joynt L; Klein K; Paramagul C; Patterson SK; Roubidoux MA
Radiology; 2004 Apr; 231(1):208-14. PubMed ID: 14990808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Minority report - false negative breast assessment in women recalled for suspicious screening mammography: imaging and pathological features, and associated delay in diagnosis.
Ciatto S; Houssami N; Ambrogetti D; Bonardi R; Collini G; Del Turco MR
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2007 Sep; 105(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 17115112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Early detection of breast cancer: overview of the evidence on computer-aided detection in mammography screening.
Houssami N; Given-Wilson R; Ciatto S
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2009 Apr; 53(2):171-6. PubMed ID: 19527363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of standard and double reading and computer-aided detection (CAD) of interval cancers at prior negative screening mammograms: blind review.
Ciatto S; Rosselli Del Turco M; Burke P; Visioli C; Paci E; Zappa M
Br J Cancer; 2003 Nov; 89(9):1645-9. PubMed ID: 14583763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Soft-copy reading in digital mammography of mass: diagnostic performance of a 5-megapixel cathode ray tube monitor versus a 3-megapixel liquid crystal display monitor in a diagnostic setting.
Uematsu T; Kasami M
Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):623-9. PubMed ID: 18568553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
