159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22647420)
21. Computer-aided detection of masses at mammography: interactive decision support versus prompts.
Hupse R; Samulski M; Lobbes MB; Mann RM; Mus R; den Heeten GJ; Beijerinck D; Pijnappel RM; Boetes C; Karssemeijer N
Radiology; 2013 Jan; 266(1):123-9. PubMed ID: 23091171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison of two commercial systems for computer-assisted detection (CAD) as an aid to interpreting screening mammograms.
Ciatto S; Ambrogetti D; Bonardi R; Brancato B; Catarzi S; Risso G; Rosselli Del Turco M
Radiol Med; 2004; 107(5-6):480-8. PubMed ID: 15195010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. 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]
25. Multi-scale textural feature extraction and particle swarm optimization based model selection for false positive reduction in mammography.
Zyout I; Czajkowska J; Grzegorzek M
Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2015 Dec; 46 Pt 2():95-107. PubMed ID: 25795630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. 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]
27. Mammographic density and cancer detection: does digital imaging challenge our current understanding?
Al Mousa DS; Mello-Thoms C; Ryan EA; Lee WB; Pietrzyk MW; Reed WM; Heard R; Poulos A; Tan J; Li Y; Brennan PC
Acad Radiol; 2014 Nov; 21(11):1377-85. PubMed ID: 25097013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Correlation between mammographic density and volumetric fibroglandular tissue estimated on breast MR images.
Wei J; Chan HP; Helvie MA; Roubidoux MA; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Zhou C; Paquerault S; Chenevert T; Goodsitt MM
Med Phys; 2004 Apr; 31(4):933-42. PubMed ID: 15125012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Computer-aided mass detection in mammography: false positive reduction via gray-scale invariant ranklet texture features.
Masotti M; Lanconelli N; Campanini R
Med Phys; 2009 Feb; 36(2):311-6. PubMed ID: 19291970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Computer-aided detection in direct digital full-field mammography: initial results.
Baum F; Fischer U; Obenauer S; Grabbe E
Eur Radiol; 2002 Dec; 12(12):3015-7. PubMed ID: 12439584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. CAD in full-field digital mammography-influence of reader experience and application of CAD on interpretation of time.
Sohns C; Angic BC; Sossalla S; Konietschke F; Obenauer S
Clin Imaging; 2010; 34(6):418-24. PubMed ID: 21092870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Dedicated breast CT: fibroglandular volume measurements in a diagnostic population.
Vedantham S; Shi L; Karellas A; O'Connell AM
Med Phys; 2012 Dec; 39(12):7317-28. PubMed ID: 23231281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Automated Volumetric Breast Density Measurements in the Era of the BI-RADS Fifth Edition: A Comparison With Visual Assessment.
Youk JH; Gweon HM; Son EJ; Kim JA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 May; 206(5):1056-62. PubMed ID: 26934689
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Radiologist assessment of breast density by BI-RADS categories versus fully automated volumetric assessment.
Gweon HM; Youk JH; Kim JA; Son EJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Sep; 201(3):692-7. PubMed ID: 23971465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: effects of image processing and lesion type.
Cole EB; Pisano ED; Kistner EO; Muller KE; Brown ME; Feig SA; Jong RA; Maidment AD; Staiger MJ; Kuzmiak CM; Freimanis RI; Lesko N; Rosen EL; Walsh R; Williford M; Braeuning MP
Radiology; 2003 Jan; 226(1):153-60. PubMed ID: 12511684
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. What effect does mammographic breast density have on lesion detection in digital mammography?
A L Mousa DS; Ryan EA; Mello-Thoms C; Brennan PC
Clin Radiol; 2014 Apr; 69(4):333-41. PubMed ID: 24424328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Volumetric breast composition analysis: reproducibility of breast percent density and fibroglandular tissue volume measurements in serial mammograms.
Engelken F; Singh JM; Fallenberg EM; Bick U; Böttcher J; Renz DM
Acta Radiol; 2014 Feb; 55(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 23878356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Reduction of False-Positive Markings on Mammograms: a Retrospective Comparison Study Using an Artificial Intelligence-Based CAD.
Mayo RC; Kent D; Sen LC; Kapoor M; Leung JWT; Watanabe AT
J Digit Imaging; 2019 Aug; 32(4):618-624. PubMed ID: 30963339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Evaluation of computer-aided detection systems in the detection of small invasive breast carcinoma.
Ellis RL; Meade AA; Mathiason MA; Willison KM; Logan-Young W
Radiology; 2007 Oct; 245(1):88-94. PubMed ID: 17885183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
