161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16885614)
1. Receiver operating characteristic analysis for the detection of simulated microcalcifications on mammograms using hardcopy images.
Lai CJ; Shaw CC; Whitman GJ; Yang WT; Dempsey PJ; Nguyen V; Ice MF
Phys Med Biol; 2006 Aug; 51(16):3901-19. PubMed ID: 16885614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Visibility of simulated microcalcifications--a hardcopy-based comparison of three mammographic systems.
Lai CJ; Shaw CC; Whitman GJ; Johnston DA; Yang WT; Selinko V; Arribas E; Dogan B; Kappadath SC
Med Phys; 2005 Jan; 32(1):182-94. PubMed ID: 15719969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Microcalcification detectability for four mammographic detectors: flat-panel, CCD, CR, and screen/film).
Rong XJ; Shaw CC; Johnston DA; Lemacks MR; Liu X; Whitman GJ; Dryden MJ; Stephens TW; Thompson SK; Krugh KT; Lai CJ
Med Phys; 2002 Sep; 29(9):2052-61. PubMed ID: 12349926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Computed radiography versus screen-film mammography in detection of simulated microcalcifications: a receiver operating characteristic study based on phantom images.
Shaw CC; Wang T; King JL; Breitenstein DS; Chang TS; Harris KM; Baratz AB; Ganott MA; Reginella R; Sumkin JH; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 1998 Mar; 5(3):173-80. PubMed ID: 9522883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quantification of Al-equivalent thickness of just visible microcalcifications in full field digital mammograms.
Carton AK; Bosmans H; Vandenbroucke D; Souverijns G; Van Ongeval C; Dragusin O; Marchal G
Med Phys; 2004 Jul; 31(7):2165-76. PubMed ID: 15305471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of slot scanning digital mammography system with full-field digital mammography system.
Lai CJ; Shaw CC; Geiser W; Chen L; Arribas E; Stephens T; Davis PL; Ayyar GP; Dogan BE; Nguyen VA; Whitman GJ; Yang WT
Med Phys; 2008 Jun; 35(6):2339-46. PubMed ID: 18649467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Microcalcification detection using cone-beam CT mammography with a flat-panel imager.
Gong X; Vedula AA; Glick SJ
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Jun; 49(11):2183-95. PubMed ID: 15248571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Storage phosphor direct magnification mammography in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography--a phantom study.
Funke M; Breiter N; Hermann KP; Oestmann JW; Grabbe E
Br J Radiol; 1998 May; 71(845):528-34. PubMed ID: 9691898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Full-field digital mammography: a phantom study for detection of microcalcification].
Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Schorn C; Funke M; Fischer U; Grabbe E
Rofo; 2000 Jul; 172(7):646-50. PubMed ID: 10962993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Digital storage phosphor mammography in a magnification technic: experimental studies for spatial resolution and for detection of microcalcifications].
Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Hundertmark C; Sachs J; Gruhl T; Sperner W; Grabbe E
Rofo; 1997 Aug; 167(2):174-9. PubMed ID: 9333359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Dose reduction in full-field digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study.
Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Grabbe E
Br J Radiol; 2003 Jul; 76(907):478-82. PubMed ID: 12857708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Magnification mammography: a comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for the detection of simulated small masses and microcalcifications.
Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Funke M; Grabbe EH
Eur Radiol; 2002 Sep; 12(9):2188-91. PubMed ID: 12195468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Detection of simulated microcalcifications in fixed mammary tissue: An ROC study of the effect of local versus global histogram equalization.
Sund T; Olsen JB
Acta Radiol; 2006 Sep; 47(7):650-4. PubMed ID: 16950699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Detection of simulated lesions on data-compressed digital mammograms.
Suryanarayanan S; Karellas A; Vedantham S; Waldrop SM; D'Orsi CJ
Radiology; 2005 Jul; 236(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 15983071
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The first trial of phase contrast imaging for digital full-field mammography using a practical molybdenum x-ray tube.
Tanaka T; Honda C; Matsuo S; Noma K; Oohara H; Nitta N; Ota S; Tsuchiya K; Sakashita Y; Yamada A; Yamasaki M; Furukawa A; Takahashi M; Murata K
Invest Radiol; 2005 Jul; 40(7):385-96. PubMed ID: 15973129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of dose reduction on the ability of digital mammography to detect simulated microcalcifications.
Yakabe M; Sakai S; Yabuuchi H; Matsuo Y; Kamitani T; Setoguchi T; Cho M; Masuda M; Sasaki M
J Digit Imaging; 2010 Oct; 23(5):520-6. PubMed ID: 19415382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Microcalcification detectability using a bench-top prototype photon-counting breast CT based on a Si strip detector.
Cho HM; Ding H; Barber WC; Iwanczyk JS; Molloi S
Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):4401-10. PubMed ID: 26133636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [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]
19. Comparison of two screen-film combinations in contact and magnification mammography: detectability of microcalcifications.
Oestmann JW; Kopans DB; Linetsky L; Hall DA; McCarthy KA; White G; Swann C; Kelley JE; Johnson LL
Radiology; 1988 Sep; 168(3):657-9. PubMed ID: 3406394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of the Detection Rate of Simulated Microcalcifications in Full-Field Digital Mammography, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, and Synthetically Reconstructed 2-Dimensional Images Performed With 2 Different Digital X-ray Mammography Systems.
Peters S; Hellmich M; Stork A; Kemper J; Grinstein O; Püsken M; Stahlhut L; Kinner S; Maintz D; Krug KB
Invest Radiol; 2017 Apr; 52(4):206-215. PubMed ID: 27861206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
