BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16885614)

  • 21. Deep learning denoising of digital breast tomosynthesis: Observer performance study of the effect on detection of microcalcifications in breast phantom images.
    Chan HP; Helvie MA; Gao M; Hadjiiski L; Zhou C; Garver K; Klein KA; McLaughlin C; Oudsema R; Rahman WT; Roubidoux MA
    Med Phys; 2023 Oct; 50(10):6177-6189. PubMed ID: 37145996
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The use of an interactive software program for quantitative characterization of microcalcifications on digitized film-screen mammograms.
    Leichter I; Lederman R; Bamberger P; Novak B; Fields S; Buchbinder SS
    Invest Radiol; 1999 Jun; 34(6):394-400. PubMed ID: 10353031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Film-screen magnification versus electronic magnification and enhancement of digitized contact mammograms in the assessment of subtle microcalcifications.
    Perisinakis K; Damilakis J; Kontogiannis E; Gourtsoyiannis N
    Invest Radiol; 2001 Dec; 36(12):726-33. PubMed ID: 11753144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD).
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Wenkel E; Bautz W
    Rontgenpraxis; 2001; 54(4):123-6. PubMed ID: 11883115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Quantitative comparison of clustered microcalcifications in for-presentation and for-processing mammograms in full-field digital mammography.
    Wang J; Nishikawa RM; Yang Y
    Med Phys; 2017 Jul; 44(7):3726-3738. PubMed ID: 28477395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging: scatter and nonuniformity corrections.
    Kappadath SC; Shaw CC
    Med Phys; 2005 Nov; 32(11):3395-408. PubMed ID: 16372415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Diagnosis of breast calcifications: comparison of contact, magnified, and television-enhanced images.
    Kimme-Smith C; Gold RH; Bassett LW; Gormley L; Morioka C
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 Nov; 153(5):963-7. PubMed ID: 2801445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Performance of a flat-panel detector in the detection of artificial erosive changes: comparison with conventional screen-film and storage-phosphor radiography.
    Ludwig K; Henschel A; Bernhardt TM; Lenzen H; Wormanns D; Diederich S; Heindel W
    Eur Radiol; 2003 Jun; 13(6):1316-23. PubMed ID: 12764648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Objective assessment of image quality in conventional and digital mammography taking into account dynamic range.
    Pachoud M; Lepori D; Valley JF; Verdun FR
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):380-2. PubMed ID: 15933141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Visibility of microcalcification in cone beam breast CT: effects of X-ray tube voltage and radiation dose.
    Lai CJ; Shaw CC; Chen L; Altunbas MC; Liu X; Han T; Wang T; Yang WT; Whitman GJ; Tu SJ
    Med Phys; 2007 Jul; 34(7):2995-3004. PubMed ID: 17822008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Storage phosphor and film-screen mammography: performance with different mammographic techniques.
    Kheddache S; Thilander-Klang A; Lanhede B; Månsson LG; Bjurstam N; Ackerholm P; Björneld L
    Eur Radiol; 1999; 9(4):591-7. PubMed ID: 10354868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The simulation of 3D microcalcification clusters in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
    Shaheen E; Van Ongeval C; Zanca F; Cockmartin L; Marshall N; Jacobs J; Young KC; R Dance D; Bosmans H
    Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6659-71. PubMed ID: 22149848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Detecting clustered microcalcifications in the female breast: secondary digitized images versus mammograms.
    De Maeseneer M; Beeckman P; Osteaux M; Mattheus R; Hoste M; Bastaerts Y; Jong B
    J Belge Radiol; 1992 Jun; 75(3):173-8. PubMed ID: 1400145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Digital slot-scan charge-coupled device radiography versus AMBER and Bucky screen-film radiography for detection of simulated nodules and interstitial disease in a chest phantom.
    Kroft LJ; Geleijns J; Mertens BJ; Veldkamp WJ; Zonderland HM; de Roos A
    Radiology; 2004 Apr; 231(1):156-63. PubMed ID: 14990807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Evaluation of a wavelet-based computer-assisted detection system for identifying microcalcifications in digital full-field mammography.
    Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Bollow M; Hermann KG; Richter K; Heinlein P; Schneider W; Hamm B
    Acta Radiol; 2004 Apr; 45(2):136-41. PubMed ID: 15191095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [Computer-aided diagnosis in the detection of simulated clustered microcalcifications on mammography].
    Horino K
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1998 Jun; 58(7):343-8. PubMed ID: 9711073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Computer-aided detection of mammographic microcalcifications: pattern recognition with an artificial neural network.
    Chan HP; Lo SC; Sahiner B; Lam KL; Helvie MA
    Med Phys; 1995 Oct; 22(10):1555-67. PubMed ID: 8551980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Computer aided detection of clusters of microcalcifications on full field digital mammograms.
    Ge J; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Chan HP; Wei J; Helvie MA; Zhou C
    Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2975-88. PubMed ID: 16964876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Experimental evaluation of a portable indirect flat-panel detector for the pediatric chest: comparison with storage phosphor radiography at different exposures by using a chest phantom.
    Rapp-Bernhardt U; Bernhardt TM; Lenzen H; Esseling R; Roehl FW; Schiborr M; Theobald-Hormann I; Heindel W
    Radiology; 2005 Nov; 237(2):485-91. PubMed ID: 16170012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.