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.
132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21158311)
41. Boundary modelling and shape analysis methods for classification of mammographic masses. Rangayyan RM; Mudigonda NR; Desautels JE Med Biol Eng Comput; 2000 Sep; 38(5):487-96. PubMed ID: 11094803 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. A computational model to generate simulated three-dimensional breast masses. de Sisternes L; Brankov JG; Zysk AM; Schmidt RA; Nishikawa RM; Wernick MN Med Phys; 2015 Feb; 42(2):1098-118. PubMed ID: 25652522 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Computerized characterization of masses on mammograms: the rubber band straightening transform and texture analysis. Sahiner B; Chan HP; Petrick N; Helvie MA; Goodsitt MM Med Phys; 1998 Apr; 25(4):516-26. PubMed ID: 9571620 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Breast mass segmentation in mammography using plane fitting and dynamic programming. Song E; Jiang L; Jin R; Zhang L; Yuan Y; Li Q Acad Radiol; 2009 Jul; 16(7):826-35. PubMed ID: 19362024 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Effect of a novel segmentation algorithm on radiologists' diagnosis of breast masses using ultrasound imaging. Tian JW; Ning CP; Guo YH; Cheng HD; Tang XL Ultrasound Med Biol; 2012 Jan; 38(1):119-27. PubMed ID: 22104530 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Predicting error in detecting mammographic masses among radiology trainees using statistical models based on BI-RADS features. Grimm LJ; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Kuzmiak CM; Kim C; Mazurowski MA Med Phys; 2014 Mar; 41(3):031909. PubMed ID: 24593727 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Breast masses in mammography classification with local contour features. Li H; Meng X; Wang T; Tang Y; Yin Y Biomed Eng Online; 2017 Apr; 16(1):44. PubMed ID: 28410616 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Investigation of psychophysical measure for evaluation of similar images for mammographic masses: preliminary results. Muramatsu C; Li Q; Suzuki K; Schmidt RA; Shiraishi J; Newstead GM; Doi K Med Phys; 2005 Jul; 32(7):2295-304. PubMed ID: 16121585 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Computer-aided classification of mammographic masses using visually sensitive image features. Wang Y; Aghaei F; Zarafshani A; Qiu Y; Qian W; Zheng B J Xray Sci Technol; 2017; 25(1):171-186. PubMed ID: 27911353 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Computer-aided detection of breast masses on mammograms: dual system approach with two-view analysis. Wei J; Chan HP; Sahiner B; Zhou C; Hadjiiski LM; Roubidoux MA; Helvie MA Med Phys; 2009 Oct; 36(10):4451-60. PubMed ID: 19928076 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. How mammographic breast density affects radiologists' visual search patterns. Al Mousa DS; Brennan PC; Ryan EA; Lee WB; Tan J; Mello-Thoms C Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1386-93. PubMed ID: 25172414 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. 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]
53. A new automated method for the segmentation and characterization of breast masses on ultrasound images. Cui J; Sahiner B; Chan HP; Nees A; Paramagul C; Hadjiiski LM; Zhou C; Shi J Med Phys; 2009 May; 36(5):1553-65. PubMed ID: 19544771 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Computer-aided diagnosis of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: A feasibility study. Patel BK; Ranjbar S; Wu T; Pockaj BA; Li J; Zhang N; Lobbes M; Zhang B; Mitchell JR Eur J Radiol; 2018 Jan; 98():207-213. PubMed ID: 29279165 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. A dual-stage method for lesion segmentation on digital mammograms. Yuan Y; Giger ML; Li H; Suzuki K; Sennett C Med Phys; 2007 Nov; 34(11):4180-93. PubMed ID: 18072482 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Comparative performance of multiview stereoscopic and mammographic display modalities for breast lesion detection. Webb LJ; Samei E; Lo JY; Baker JA; Ghate SV; Kim C; Soo MS; Walsh R Med Phys; 2011 Apr; 38(4):1972-80. PubMed ID: 21626930 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Correspondence in texture features between two mammographic views. Gupta S; Markey MK Med Phys; 2005 Jun; 32(6):1598-606. PubMed ID: 16013719 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Computerized characterization of breast masses on three-dimensional ultrasound volumes. Sahiner B; Chan HP; Roubidoux MA; Helvie MA; Hadjiiski LM; Ramachandran A; Paramagul C; LeCarpentier GL; Nees A; Blane C Med Phys; 2004 Apr; 31(4):744-54. PubMed ID: 15124991 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Breast image pre-processing for mammographic tissue segmentation. He W; Hogg P; Juette A; Denton ER; Zwiggelaar R Comput Biol Med; 2015 Dec; 67():61-73. PubMed ID: 26498046 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Automated registration of diagnostic to prediagnostic x-ray mammograms: evaluation and comparison to radiologists' accuracy. Pinto Pereira SM; Hipwell JH; McCormack VA; Tanner C; Moss SM; Wilkinson LS; Khoo LA; Pagliari C; Skippage PL; Kliger CJ; Hawkes DJ; Silva IM Med Phys; 2010 Sep; 37(9):4530-9. PubMed ID: 20964170 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]