145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22830771)
1. A comparison study of image features between FFDM and film mammogram images.
Jing H; Yang Y; Wernick MN; Yarusso LM; Nishikawa RM
Med Phys; 2012 Jul; 39(7):4386-94. PubMed ID: 22830771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Quantitative comparison of clustered microcalcifications in for-presentation and for-processing mammograms in full-field digital mammography.
Wang J; Nishikawa RM; Yang Y
Med Phys; 2017 Jul; 44(7):3726-3738. PubMed ID: 28477395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effects of exposure equalization on image signal-to-noise ratios in digital mammography: a simulation study with an anthropomorphic breast phantom.
Liu X; Lai CJ; Whitman GJ; Geiser WR; Shen Y; Yi Y; Shaw CC
Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6489-501. PubMed ID: 22149832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Computer-aided detection of masses in full-field digital mammography using screen-film mammograms for training.
Kallenberg M; Karssemeijer N
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Dec; 53(23):6879-91. PubMed ID: 19001703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Computer aided detection of clusters of microcalcifications on full field digital mammograms.
Ge J; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Chan HP; Wei J; Helvie MA; Zhou C
Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2975-88. PubMed ID: 16964876
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Improving the accuracy in detection of clustered microcalcifications with a context-sensitive classification model.
Wang J; Nishikawa RM; Yang Y
Med Phys; 2016 Jan; 43(1):159. PubMed ID: 26745908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose.
Berns EA; Hendrick RE; Cutter GR
Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):334-40. PubMed ID: 12674233
[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. Computer-aided diagnosis of masses with full-field digital mammography.
Li L; Clark RA; Thomas JA
Acad Radiol; 2002 Jan; 9(1):4-12. PubMed ID: 11918357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Multimodality computer-aided breast cancer diagnosis with FFDM and DCE-MRI.
Yuan Y; Giger ML; Li H; Bhooshan N; Sennett CA
Acad Radiol; 2010 Sep; 17(9):1158-67. PubMed ID: 20692620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial.
Hendrick RE; Pisano ED; Averbukh A; Moran C; Berns EA; Yaffe MJ; Herman B; Acharyya S; Gatsonis C
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Feb; 194(2):362-9. PubMed ID: 20093597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Noise equalization for detection of microcalcification clusters in direct digital mammogram images.
McLoughlin KJ; Bones PJ; Karssemeijer N
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2004 Mar; 23(3):313-20. PubMed ID: 15027524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Computer-aided detection; the effect of training databases on detection of subtle breast masses.
Zheng B; Wang X; Lederman D; Tan J; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 2010 Nov; 17(11):1401-8. PubMed ID: 20650667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinations.
Lewin JM; Hendrick RE; D'Orsi CJ; Isaacs PK; Moss LJ; Karellas A; Sisney GA; Kuni CC; Cutter GR
Radiology; 2001 Mar; 218(3):873-80. PubMed ID: 11230669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A method to test the reproducibility and to improve performance of computer-aided detection schemes for digitized mammograms.
Zheng B; Gur D; Good WF; Hardesty LA
Med Phys; 2004 Nov; 31(11):2964-72. PubMed ID: 15587648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
