151 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23528569)
1. Improved microcalcification visualization using dual-energy digital mammography.
Tsai CJ; Chen RC; Peng HL; Hsu WL; Lee JJ
Acta Radiol; 2013 Jul; 54(6):614-21. PubMed ID: 23528569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Feasibility study for the improvement of microcalcification visualization in different breast thicknesses and tissue components using a dual-energy approach in digital mammography.
Tsai CJ; Chen RC; Hung SH; Wu J; Peng HL; Lee JJ
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2012; 36(4):488-94. PubMed ID: 22805681
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Algorithmic scatter correction in dual-energy digital mammography.
Chen X; Nishikawa RM; Chan ST; Lau BA; Zhang L; Mou X
Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):111919. PubMed ID: 24320452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Quantitative evaluation of dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging.
Kappadath SC; Shaw CC
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Jun; 49(12):2563-76. PubMed ID: 15272674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Dual-energy digital mammography: calibration and inverse-mapping techniques to estimate calcification thickness and glandular-tissue ratio.
Kappadath SC; Shaw CC
Med Phys; 2003 Jun; 30(6):1110-7. PubMed ID: 12852535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Impact of compressed breast thickness and dose on lesion detectability in digital mammography: FROC study with simulated lesions in real mammograms.
Salvagnini E; Bosmans H; Van Ongeval C; Van Steen A; Michielsen K; Cockmartin L; Struelens L; Marshall NW
Med Phys; 2016 Sep; 43(9):5104. PubMed ID: 27587041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Effect of image quality on calcification detection in digital mammography.
Warren LM; Mackenzie A; Cooke J; Given-Wilson RM; Wallis MG; Chakraborty DP; Dance DR; Bosmans H; Young KC
Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6):3202-13. PubMed ID: 22755704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Dose reduction in full-field digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study.
Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Grabbe E
Br J Radiol; 2003 Jul; 76(907):478-82. PubMed ID: 12857708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantification of Al-equivalent thickness of just visible microcalcifications in full field digital mammograms.
Carton AK; Bosmans H; Vandenbroucke D; Souverijns G; Van Ongeval C; Dragusin O; Marchal G
Med Phys; 2004 Jul; 31(7):2165-76. PubMed ID: 15305471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Improvement of detectability of microcalcifications by magnification digital mammography].
Higashida Y; Hatemura M; Yoshida A; Takada T; Takahashi M
Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1998 Aug; 58(9):473-8. PubMed ID: 9778932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of dose reduction on the ability of digital mammography to detect simulated microcalcifications.
Yakabe M; Sakai S; Yabuuchi H; Matsuo Y; Kamitani T; Setoguchi T; Cho M; Masuda M; Sasaki M
J Digit Imaging; 2010 Oct; 23(5):520-6. PubMed ID: 19415382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Scale-space signatures for the detection of clustered microcalculations in digital mammograms.
Netsch T; Peitgen HO
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 1999 Sep; 18(9):774-86. PubMed ID: 10571382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A scatter correction method for dual-energy digital mammography: Monte Carlo simulation.
Ai K; Gao Y; Yu G
J Xray Sci Technol; 2014; 22(5):653-71. PubMed ID: 25265925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of clinical image processing algorithms used in digital mammography.
Zanca F; Jacobs J; Van Ongeval C; Claus F; Celis V; Geniets C; Provost V; Pauwels H; Marchal G; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2009 Mar; 36(3):765-75. PubMed ID: 19378737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging: scatter and nonuniformity corrections.
Kappadath SC; Shaw CC
Med Phys; 2005 Nov; 32(11):3395-408. PubMed ID: 16372415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Digital mammography: observer performance study of the effects of pixel size on the characterization of malignant and benign microcalcifications.
Chan HP; Helvie MA; Petrick N; Sahiner B; Adler DD; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA; Blane CE; Joynt LK; Wilson TE; Hadjiiski LM; Goodsitt MM
Acad Radiol; 2001 Jun; 8(6):454-66. PubMed ID: 11394537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Analysis of computer-aided detection techniques and signal characteristics for clustered microcalcifications on digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Samala RK; Chan HP; Hadjiiski LM; Helvie MA
Phys Med Biol; 2016 Oct; 61(19):7092-7112. PubMed ID: 27648708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Microcalcification detection using cone-beam CT mammography with a flat-panel imager.
Gong X; Vedula AA; Glick SJ
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Jun; 49(11):2183-95. PubMed ID: 15248571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [ROC analysis comparing screen film mammography and digital mammography].
Gaspard-Bakhach S; Dilhuydy MH; Bonichon F; Barreau B; Henriques C; Maugey-Laulom B
J Radiol; 2000 Feb; 81(2):133-9. PubMed ID: 10705143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
