93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23434202)
1. Automated volumetric breast density estimation: a comparison with visual assessment.
Seo JM; Ko ES; Han BK; Ko EY; Shin JH; Hahn SY
Clin Radiol; 2013 Jul; 68(7):690-5. PubMed ID: 23434202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mammographic Breast Density Assessment Using Automated Volumetric Software and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) Categorization by Expert Radiologists.
Damases CN; Brennan PC; Mello-Thoms C; McEntee MF
Acad Radiol; 2016 Jan; 23(1):70-7. PubMed ID: 26514436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Breast Density Estimation with Fully Automated Volumetric Method: Comparison to Radiologists' Assessment by BI-RADS Categories.
Singh T; Sharma M; Singla V; Khandelwal N
Acad Radiol; 2016 Jan; 23(1):78-83. PubMed ID: 26521687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Consistency of breast density categories in serial screening mammograms: A comparison between automated and human assessment.
Holland K; van Zelst J; den Heeten GJ; Imhof-Tas M; Mann RM; van Gils CH; Karssemeijer N
Breast; 2016 Oct; 29():49-54. PubMed ID: 27420382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Volumetric breast density assessment: reproducibility in serial examinations and comparison with visual assessment.
Singh JM; Fallenberg EM; Diekmann F; Renz DM; Witlandt R; Bick U; Engelken F
Rofo; 2013 Sep; 185(9):844-8. PubMed ID: 23888472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of Visual Assessment of Breast Density in BI-RADS 4th and 5th Editions With Automated Volumetric Measurement.
Youk JH; Kim SJ; Son EJ; Gweon HM; Kim JA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Sep; 209(3):703-708. PubMed ID: 28657850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Classification of fatty and dense breast parenchyma: comparison of automatic volumetric density measurement and radiologists' classification and their inter-observer variation.
Østerås BH; Martinsen AC; Brandal SH; Chaudhry KN; Eben E; Haakenaasen U; Falk RS; Skaane P
Acta Radiol; 2016 Oct; 57(10):1178-85. PubMed ID: 26792823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Comparison between software volumetric breast density estimates in breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography images in a large public screening cohort.
Förnvik D; Förnvik H; Fieselmann A; Lång K; Sartor H
Eur Radiol; 2019 Jan; 29(1):330-336. PubMed ID: 29943180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of mammographic density estimation by Volpara software with radiologists' visual assessment: analysis of clinical-radiologic factors affecting discrepancy between them.
Lee HN; Sohn YM; Han KH
Acta Radiol; 2015 Sep; 56(9):1061-8. PubMed ID: 25338836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Measuring mammographic density: comparing a fully automated volumetric assessment versus European radiologists' qualitative classification.
Sartor H; Lång K; Rosso A; Borgquist S; Zackrisson S; Timberg P
Eur Radiol; 2016 Dec; 26(12):4354-4360. PubMed ID: 27011371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Evaluating hormone therapy-associated increases in breast density comparison between reported and simultaneous assignment of BI-RADS categories, visual assessment, and quantitative analysis.
Harvey JA; Bovbjerg VE; Smolkin ME; Williams MB; Petroni GR
Acad Radiol; 2005 Jul; 12(7):853-62. PubMed ID: 16039539
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: comparison with radiologists' estimates and BI-RADS categories.
Martin KE; Helvie MA; Zhou C; Roubidoux MA; Bailey JE; Paramagul C; Blane CE; Klein KA; Sonnad SS; Chan HP
Radiology; 2006 Sep; 240(3):656-65. PubMed ID: 16857974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of variability in breast density assessment by BI-RADS category according to the level of experience.
Eom HJ; Cha JH; Kang JW; Choi WJ; Kim HJ; Go E
Acta Radiol; 2018 May; 59(5):527-532. PubMed ID: 28766978
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Inter-observer variability in mammographic density assessment using Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) synoptic scales.
Damases CN; Mello-Thoms C; McEntee MF
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2016 Jun; 60(3):329-36. PubMed ID: 27059785
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Using Volumetric Breast Density to Quantify the Potential Masking Risk of Mammographic Density.
Destounis S; Johnston L; Highnam R; Arieno A; Morgan R; Chan A
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jan; 208(1):222-227. PubMed ID: 27824483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparing Visually Assessed BI-RADS Breast Density and Automated Volumetric Breast Density Software: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Breast Cancer Screening Setting.
van der Waal D; den Heeten GJ; Pijnappel RM; Schuur KH; Timmers JM; Verbeek AL; Broeders MJ
PLoS One; 2015; 10(9):e0136667. PubMed ID: 26335569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of automated volumetric breast density software in comparison with visual assessments in an Asian population: A retrospective observational study.
Rahmat K; Ab Mumin N; Ramli Hamid MT; Fadzli F; Ng WL; Muhammad Gowdh NF
Medicine (Baltimore); 2020 Sep; 99(39):e22405. PubMed ID: 32991467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of subjective and fully automated methods for measuring mammographic density.
Moshina N; Roman M; Sebuødegård S; Waade GG; Ursin G; Hofvind S
Acta Radiol; 2018 Feb; 59(2):154-160. PubMed ID: 28565960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
