These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

83 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17203444)

  • 41. Mammographic computer-aided detection systems.
    Health Devices; 2003 Apr; 32(4):141-64. PubMed ID: 12760158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Soft-copy mammographic readings with different computer-assisted detection cuing environments: preliminary findings.
    Zheng B; Ganott MA; Britton CA; Hakim CM; Hardesty LA; Chang TS; Rockette HE; Gur D
    Radiology; 2001 Dec; 221(3):633-40. PubMed ID: 11719657
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Performance assessment for radiologists interpreting screening mammography.
    Woodard DB; Gelfand AE; Barlow WE; Elmore JG
    Stat Med; 2007 Mar; 26(7):1532-51. PubMed ID: 16847870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Are unnecessary follow-up procedures induced by computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) in mammography? Comparison of mammographic diagnosis with and without use of CAD.
    Marx C; Malich A; Facius M; Grebenstein U; Sauner D; Pfleiderer SO; Kaiser WA
    Eur J Radiol; 2004 Jul; 51(1):66-72. PubMed ID: 15186887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. 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]  

  • 46. 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]  

  • 47. Impact of Breast Reader Assessment Strategy on mammographic radiologists' test reading performance.
    Suleiman WI; Rawashdeh MA; Lewis SJ; McEntee MF; Lee W; Tapia K; Brennan PC
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2016 Jun; 60(3):352-8. PubMed ID: 27062490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Contralateral lesions detected by preoperative MRI in patients with recently diagnosed breast cancer: application of MR CAD in differentiation of benign and malignant lesions.
    Cho N; Kim SM; Park JS; Jang M; Kim SY; Chang JM; Moon WK
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Jul; 81(7):1520-6. PubMed ID: 21498016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Computer-aided detection for screening mammography.
    Astley SM
    Acad Radiol; 2004 Oct; 11(10):1139-43. PubMed ID: 15530806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. 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]  

  • 51. Computerized analysis of images in the detection and diagnosis of breast cancer.
    Giger ML
    Semin Ultrasound CT MR; 2004 Oct; 25(5):411-8. PubMed ID: 15559124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. [Computer-aided diagnosis of breast cancer].
    Uchiyama Y
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 2002 Jul; 62(8):409-14. PubMed ID: 12187836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Evaluation of computer-aided diagnosis in breast ultrasonography: Improvement in diagnostic performance of inexperienced radiologists.
    Nicosia L; Addante F; Bozzini AC; Latronico A; Montesano M; Meneghetti L; Tettamanzi F; Frassoni S; Bagnardi V; De Santis R; Pesapane F; Fodor CI; Mastropasqua MG; Cassano E
    Clin Imaging; 2022 Feb; 82():150-155. PubMed ID: 34826773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Determining efficacy of mammographic CAD systems.
    Hoffmeister JW; Rogers SK; DeSimio MP; Brem RF
    J Digit Imaging; 2002; 15 Suppl 1():198-200. PubMed ID: 12105727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. False positive marks on unsuspicious screening mammography with computer-aided detection.
    Mahoney MC; Meganathan K
    J Digit Imaging; 2011 Oct; 24(5):772-7. PubMed ID: 21547517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Effect of human variability on independent double reading in screening mammography.
    Beam CA; Sullivan DC; Layde PM
    Acad Radiol; 1996 Nov; 3(11):891-7. PubMed ID: 8959178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Application of computer-aided diagnosis in breast ultrasound interpretation: improvements in diagnostic performance according to reader experience.
    Choi JH; Kang BJ; Baek JE; Lee HS; Kim SH
    Ultrasonography; 2018 Jul; 37(3):217-225. PubMed ID: 28992680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Prototype Internet consultation system for radiologists.
    Kovalerchuk B; Ruiz J; Vityaev E; Fisher S
    J Digit Imaging; 1998 Aug; 11(3 Suppl 1):22-6. PubMed ID: 9735426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Enhancing and evaluating diagnostic accuracy.
    Swets JA; Getty DJ; Pickett RM; D'Orsi CJ; Seltzer SE; McNeil BJ
    Med Decis Making; 1991; 11(1):9-18. PubMed ID: 2034078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Challenges in Interpretation of US Breast Findings in the Emergency Setting.
    Morozova A; Cotes C; Aran S; Singh H
    Radiographics; 2023 Oct; 43(10):e230020. PubMed ID: 37733621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.