339 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20071209)
1. A review of automatic mass detection and segmentation in mammographic images.
Oliver A; Freixenet J; Martí J; Pérez E; Pont J; Denton ER; Zwiggelaar R
Med Image Anal; 2010 Apr; 14(2):87-110. PubMed ID: 20071209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Influence of using manual or automatic breast density information in a mass detection CAD system.
Oliver A; Lladó X; Freixenet J; Martí R; Pérez E; Pont J; Zwiggelaar R
Acad Radiol; 2010 Jul; 17(7):877-83. PubMed ID: 20540910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. An evaluation of contrast enhancement techniques for mammographic breast masses.
Singh S; Bovis K
IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed; 2005 Mar; 9(1):109-19. PubMed ID: 15787013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A completely automated CAD system for mass detection in a large mammographic database.
Bellotti R; De Carlo F; Tangaro S; Gargano G; Maggipinto G; Castellano M; Massafra R; Cascio D; Fauci F; Magro R; Raso G; Lauria A; Forni G; Bagnasco S; Cerello P; Zanon E; Cheran SC; Lopez Torres E; Bottigli U; Masala GL; Oliva P; Retico A; Fantacci ME; Cataldo R; De Mitri I; De Nunzio G
Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):3066-75. PubMed ID: 16964885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. GPCALMA: implementation in Italian hospitals of a computer aided detection system for breast lesions by mammography examination.
Lauria A
Phys Med; 2009 Jun; 25(2):58-72. PubMed ID: 18602854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A concentric morphology model for the detection of masses in mammography.
Eltonsy NH; Tourassi GD; Elmaghraby AS
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2007 Jun; 26(6):880-9. PubMed ID: 17679338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Markov random field-based clustering applied to the segmentation of masses in digital mammograms.
Suliga M; Deklerck R; Nyssen E
Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2008 Sep; 32(6):502-12. PubMed ID: 18620842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Mammography segmentation with maximum likelihood active contours.
Rahmati P; Adler A; Hamarneh G
Med Image Anal; 2012 Aug; 16(6):1167-86. PubMed ID: 22831774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Automatic detection of microcalcifications with multi-fractal spectrum.
Ding Y; Dai H; Zhang H
Biomed Mater Eng; 2014; 24(6):3049-54. PubMed ID: 25227013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of breast tissue classification techniques.
Oliver A; Freixenet J; Martí R; Zwiggelaar R
Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv; 2006; 9(Pt 2):872-9. PubMed ID: 17354855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Performance of computer-aided detection applied to full-field digital mammography in detection of breast cancers.
Sadaf A; Crystal P; Scaranelo A; Helbich T
Eur J Radiol; 2011 Mar; 77(3):457-61. PubMed ID: 19875260
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Investigation of reading mode and relative sensitivity as factors that influence reader performance when using computer-aided detection software.
Paquerault S; Samuelson FW; Petrick N; Myers KJ; Smith RC
Acad Radiol; 2009 Sep; 16(9):1095-107. PubMed ID: 19523855
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Computer-aided characterization of mammographic masses: accuracy of mass segmentation and its effects on characterization.
Sahiner B; Petrick N; Chan HP; Hadjiiski LM; Paramagul C; Helvie MA; Gurcan MN
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2001 Dec; 20(12):1275-84. PubMed ID: 11811827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. False positive reduction in mammographic mass detection using local binary patterns.
Oliver A; Lladó X; Freixenet J; Martí J
Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv; 2007; 10(Pt 1):286-93. PubMed ID: 18051070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Steepest changes of a probability-based cost function for delineation of mammographic masses: a validation study.
Kinnard L; Lo SC; Makariou E; Osicka T; Wang P; Chouikha MF; Freedman MT
Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2796-810. PubMed ID: 15543787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Technique for preprocessing of digital mammogram.
Maitra IK; Nag S; Bandyopadhyay SK
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2012 Aug; 107(2):175-88. PubMed ID: 21669471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Use of normal tissue context in computer-aided detection of masses in mammograms.
Hupse R; Karssemeijer N
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2009 Dec; 28(12):2033-41. PubMed ID: 19666331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A regional registration method to find corresponding mass lesions in temporal mammogram pairs.
Timp S; van Engeland S; Karssemeijer N
Med Phys; 2005 Aug; 32(8):2629-38. PubMed ID: 16193793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Improving performance of computer-aided detection of masses by incorporating bilateral mammographic density asymmetry: an assessment.
Wang X; Li L; Xu W; Liu W; Lederman D; Zheng B
Acad Radiol; 2012 Mar; 19(3):303-10. PubMed ID: 22173323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of computer-aided detection of lesions in mammograms obtained with a digital phase-contrast mammography system.
Tanaka T; Nitta N; Ohta S; Kobayashi T; Kano A; Tsuchiya K; Murakami Y; Kitahara S; Wakamiya M; Furukawa A; Takahashi M; Murata K
Eur Radiol; 2009 Dec; 19(12):2886-95. PubMed ID: 19585121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
