181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23727379)
1. Variability of breast density assessment in short-term reimaging with digital mammography.
Kim WH; Moon WK; Kim SM; Yi A; Chang JM; Koo HR; Lee SH; Cho N
Eur J Radiol; 2013 Oct; 82(10):1724-30. PubMed ID: 23727379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Breast image pre-processing for mammographic tissue segmentation.
He W; Hogg P; Juette A; Denton ER; Zwiggelaar R
Comput Biol Med; 2015 Dec; 67():61-73. PubMed ID: 26498046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Understanding Clinical Mammographic Breast Density Assessment: a Deep Learning Perspective.
Mohamed AA; Luo Y; Peng H; Jankowitz RC; Wu S
J Digit Imaging; 2018 Aug; 31(4):387-392. PubMed ID: 28932980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison Between Digital and Synthetic 2D Mammograms in Breast Density Interpretation.
Alshafeiy TI; Wadih A; Nicholson BT; Rochman CM; Peppard HR; Patrie JT; Harvey JA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Jul; 209(1):W36-W41. PubMed ID: 28504593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influence of using manual or automatic breast density information in a mass detection CAD system.
Oliver A; Lladó X; Freixenet J; Martí R; Pérez E; Pont J; Zwiggelaar R
Acad Radiol; 2010 Jul; 17(7):877-83. PubMed ID: 20540910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. Reported mammographic density: film-screen versus digital acquisition.
Harvey JA; Gard CC; Miglioretti DL; Yankaskas BC; Kerlikowske K; Buist DS; Geller BA; Onega TL;
Radiology; 2013 Mar; 266(3):752-8. PubMed ID: 23249570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: detection in dependence of the BI-RADS categories.
Obenauer S; Sohns C; Werner C; Grabbe E
Breast J; 2006; 12(1):16-9. PubMed ID: 16409582
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reproducibility of automated volumetric breast density assessment in short-term digital mammography reimaging.
Ko ES; Kim RB; Han BK
Clin Imaging; 2015; 39(4):582-6. PubMed ID: 25754139
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Breast percent density: estimation on digital mammograms and central tomosynthesis projections.
Bakic PR; Carton AK; Kontos D; Zhang C; Troxel AB; Maidment AD
Radiology; 2009 Jul; 252(1):40-9. PubMed ID: 19420321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Reader variability in breast density estimation from full-field digital mammograms: the effect of image postprocessing on relative and absolute measures.
Keller BM; Nathan DL; Gavenonis SC; Chen J; Conant EF; Kontos D
Acad Radiol; 2013 May; 20(5):560-8. PubMed ID: 23465381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: sensitivity and reproducibility in serial examinations.
Kim SJ; Moon WK; Cho N; Cha JH; Kim SM; Im JG
Radiology; 2008 Jan; 246(1):71-80. PubMed ID: 18096530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Impact of breast density on computer-aided detection (CAD) of breast cancer].
Yang KY; Liu XJ; Zhai RY
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2012 May; 34(5):360-3. PubMed ID: 22883457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A new method for quantitative analysis of mammographic density.
Glide-Hurst CK; Duric N; Littrup P
Med Phys; 2007 Nov; 34(11):4491-8. PubMed ID: 18072514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of assigned BI-RADS breast density category definitions.
Nicholson BT; LoRusso AP; Smolkin M; Bovbjerg VE; Petroni GR; Harvey JA
Acad Radiol; 2006 Sep; 13(9):1143-9. PubMed ID: 16935726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Can digital breast tomosynthesis replace conventional diagnostic mammography views for screening recalls without calcifications? A comparison study in a simulated clinical setting.
Brandt KR; Craig DA; Hoskins TL; Henrichsen TL; Bendel EC; Brandt SR; Mandrekar J
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Feb; 200(2):291-8. PubMed ID: 23345348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Radiological assessment of breast density by visual classification (BI-RADS) compared to automated volumetric digital software (Quantra): implications for clinical practice.
Regini E; Mariscotti G; Durando M; Ghione G; Luparia A; Campanino PP; Bianchi CC; Bergamasco L; Fonio P; Gandini G
Radiol Med; 2014 Oct; 119(10):741-9. PubMed ID: 24610166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
