178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22109316)
1. Challenges in mammography: part 1, artifacts in digital mammography.
Geiser WR; Haygood TM; Santiago L; Stephens T; Thames D; Whitman GJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Dec; 197(6):W1023-30. PubMed ID: 22109316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Optimizing Digital Mammographic Image Quality for Full-Field Digital Detectors: Artifacts Encountered during the QC Process.
Jayadevan R; Armada MJ; Shaheen R; Mulcahy C; Slanetz PJ
Radiographics; 2015; 35(7):2080-9. PubMed ID: 26562238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Artifacts in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
Geiser WR; Einstein SA; Yang WT
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2018 Oct; 211(4):926-932. PubMed ID: 30063382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Digital mammography, computer-aided diagnosis, and telemammography.
Feig SA; Yaffe MJ
Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1205-30. PubMed ID: 7480666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Digital tomosynthesis: technique.
Yaffe MJ; Mainprize JG
Radiol Clin North Am; 2014 May; 52(3):489-97. PubMed ID: 24792651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Teaching syllabus for radiological aspects of breast cancer screening with digital mammography.
Van Ongeval C; Van Steen A; Bosmans H
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):191-4. PubMed ID: 18310613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Image quality, lesion detection, and diagnostic efficacy in digital mammography: full-field digital mammography versus computed radiography-based mammography using digital storage phosphor plates.
Schueller G; Riedl CC; Mallek R; Eibenberger K; Langenberger H; Kaindl E; Kulinna-Cosentini C; Rudas M; Helbich TH
Eur J Radiol; 2008 Sep; 67(3):487-96. PubMed ID: 17890036
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography in a clinical population: performance of radiologist and technologists.
van den Biggelaar FJ; Kessels AG; van Engelshoven JM; Boetes C; Flobbe K
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2010 Apr; 120(2):499-506. PubMed ID: 19418215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Clinical value of computer aided detection system in direct full-field digital mammography: a preliminary evaluation].
Sun Z; Li S; Xu HM
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2005 Jun; 85(24):1692-5. PubMed ID: 16251074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Validation of image quality in full-field digital mammography: is the replacement of wet by dry laser printers justified?
Schueller G; Kaindl E; Langenberger H; Stadler A; Schueller-Weidekamm C; Semturs F; Helbich TH
Eur J Radiol; 2007 May; 62(2):267-72. PubMed ID: 17188829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Digital mammographic artifacts on full-field systems: what are they and how do I fix them?
Ayyala RS; Chorlton M; Behrman RH; Kornguth PJ; Slanetz PJ
Radiographics; 2008; 28(7):1999-2008. PubMed ID: 19001654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Artifacts in digital mammography.
Van Ongeval C; Jacobs J; Bosmans H
JBR-BTR; 2008; 91(6):262-3. PubMed ID: 19203002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Dose reduction through gridless technique in digital full-field mammography].
Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Berzeg S; Bick U; Fischer T; Hamm B
Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):769-74. PubMed ID: 12811688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact on breast cancer diagnosis in a multidisciplinary unit after the incorporation of mammography digitalization and computer-aided detection systems.
Romero C; Varela C; Muñoz E; Almenar A; Pinto JM; Botella M
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Dec; 197(6):1492-7. PubMed ID: 22109307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Computer-aided detection with full-field digital mammography.
Technol Eval Cent Assess Program Exec Summ; 2006 May; 21(3):1-3. PubMed ID: 16718969
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Breast Mass Detection in Digital Mammogram Based on Gestalt Psychology.
Wang H; Feng J; Bu Q; Liu F; Zhang M; Ren Y; Lv Y
J Healthc Eng; 2018; 2018():4015613. PubMed ID: 29854359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comments on "Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography in a clinical population: performance of radiologist and technologists".
Freedman MT
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2010 Apr; 120(2):507-8. PubMed ID: 19551501
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Detection of clustered microcalcifications in small field digital mammography.
Arodź T; Kurdziel M; Popiela TJ; Sevre EO; Yuen DA
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2006 Jan; 81(1):56-65. PubMed ID: 16310282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
