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 *

306 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21606310)

  • 1. Full-field digital mammographic interpretation with prior analog versus prior digitized analog mammography: time for interpretation.
    Garg AS; Rapelyea JA; Rechtman LR; Torrente J; Bittner RB; Coffey CM; Brem RF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jun; 196(6):1436-8. PubMed ID: 21606310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
    Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms.
    Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Stapleton S; Young K; Castellino RA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):377-84. PubMed ID: 17242245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of the Availability of Prior Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images on the Interpretation of Mammograms.
    Hakim CM; Catullo VJ; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Kelly AE; Shinde DD; Sumkin JH; Wallace LP; Bandos AI; Gur D
    Radiology; 2015 Jul; 276(1):65-72. PubMed ID: 25768673
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of reading time between screen-film mammography and soft-copied, full-field digital mammography.
    Ishiyama M; Tsunoda-Shimizu H; Kikuchi M; Saida Y; Hiramatsu S
    Breast Cancer; 2009; 16(1):58-61. PubMed ID: 18836795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program.
    Karssemeijer N; Bluekens AM; Beijerinck D; Deurenberg JJ; Beekman M; Visser R; van Engen R; Bartels-Kortland A; Broeders MJ
    Radiology; 2009 Nov; 253(2):353-8. PubMed ID: 19703851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of soft-copy and hard-copy reading for full-field digital mammography.
    Nishikawa RM; Acharyya S; Gatsonis C; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Marques HS; D'Orsi CJ; Farria DM; Kanal KM; Mahoney MC; Rebner M; Staiger MJ;
    Radiology; 2009 Apr; 251(1):41-9. PubMed ID: 19332845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Timed efficiency of interpretation of digital and film-screen screening mammograms.
    Haygood TM; Wang J; Atkinson EN; Lane D; Stephens TW; Patel P; Whitman GJ
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Jan; 192(1):216-20. PubMed ID: 19098202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of full-field digital mammograms versus 2D synthesized mammograms for detection of microcalcifications on screening.
    Wahab RA; Lee SJ; Zhang B; Sobel L; Mahoney MC
    Eur J Radiol; 2018 Oct; 107():14-19. PubMed ID: 30292258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study.
    Gur D; Abrams GS; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Hakim CM; Perrin RL; Rathfon GY; Sumkin JH; Zuley ML; Bandos AI
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Aug; 193(2):586-91. PubMed ID: 19620460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Observer variability in screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading.
    Skaane P; Diekmann F; Balleyguier C; Diekmann S; Piguet JC; Young K; Abdelnoor M; Niklason L
    Eur Radiol; 2008 Jun; 18(6):1134-43. PubMed ID: 18301902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images.
    Skaane P; Bandos AI; Eben EB; Jebsen IN; Krager M; Haakenaasen U; Ekseth U; Izadi M; Hofvind S; Gullien R
    Radiology; 2014 Jun; 271(3):655-63. PubMed ID: 24484063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Low energy mammogram obtained in contrast-enhanced digital mammography (CEDM) is comparable to routine full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
    Francescone MA; Jochelson MS; Dershaw DD; Sung JS; Hughes MC; Zheng J; Moskowitz C; Morris EA
    Eur J Radiol; 2014 Aug; 83(8):1350-5. PubMed ID: 24932846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of radiologist performance with photon-counting full-field digital mammography to conventional full-field digital mammography.
    Cole EB; Toledano AY; Lundqvist M; Pisano ED
    Acad Radiol; 2012 Aug; 19(8):916-22. PubMed ID: 22537503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Follow-up and final results of the Oslo I Study comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading.
    Skaane P; Skjennald A; Young K; Egge E; Jebsen I; Sager EM; Scheel B; Søvik E; Ertzaas AK; Hofvind S; Abdelnoor M
    Acta Radiol; 2005 Nov; 46(7):679-89. PubMed ID: 16372686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Computer-aided detection system for clustered microcalcifications: comparison of performance on full-field digital mammograms and digitized screen-film mammograms.
    Ge J; Hadjiiski LM; Sahiner B; Wei J; Helvie MA; Zhou C; Chan HP
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Feb; 52(4):981-1000. PubMed ID: 17264365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of dry laser printer versus paper printer in full-field digital mammography.
    Liang Z; Du X; Guo X; Rong D; Kang R; Mao G; Liu J; Li K
    Acta Radiol; 2010 Apr; 51(3):235-9. PubMed ID: 20092369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Computer-aided detection systems for breast masses: comparison of performances on full-field digital mammograms and digitized screen-film mammograms.
    Wei J; Hadjiiski LM; Sahiner B; Chan HP; Ge J; Roubidoux MA; Helvie MA; Zhou C; Wu YT; Paramagul C; Zhang Y
    Acad Radiol; 2007 Jun; 14(6):659-69. PubMed ID: 17502255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Impact of and interaction between the availability of prior examinations and DBT on the interpretation of negative and benign mammograms.
    Hakim CM; Anello MI; Cohen CS; Ganott MA; Lu AH; Perrin RL; Shah R; Lee Spangler M; Bandos AI; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 2014 Apr; 21(4):445-9. PubMed ID: 24314598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.