116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26259522)
1. An Investigation into the Consistency in Mammographic Density Identification by Radiologists: Effect of Radiologist Expertise and Mammographic Appearance.
Li Y; Brennan PC; Lee W; Nickson C; Pietrzyk MW; Ryan EA
J Digit Imaging; 2015 Oct; 28(5):626-32. PubMed ID: 26259522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Does mammographic density remain a radiological challenge in the digital era?
Al-Mousa DS; Rawashdeh M; Alakhras M; Spuur KM; AbuTaimai R; Brennan PC
Acta Radiol; 2021 Jun; 62(6):707-714. PubMed ID: 32623914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Misclassification of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Mammographic Density and Implications for Breast Density Reporting Legislation.
Gard CC; Aiello Bowles EJ; Miglioretti DL; Taplin SH; Rutter CM
Breast J; 2015; 21(5):481-9. PubMed ID: 26133090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Inter-observer agreement according to three methods of evaluating mammographic density and parenchymal pattern in a case control study: impact on relative risk of breast cancer.
Winkel RR; von Euler-Chelpin M; Nielsen M; Diao P; Nielsen MB; Uldall WY; Vejborg I
BMC Cancer; 2015 Apr; 15():274. PubMed ID: 25884160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Semi-automated and fully automated mammographic density measurement and breast cancer risk prediction.
Llobet R; Pollán M; Antón J; Miranda-García J; Casals M; Martínez I; Ruiz-Perales F; Pérez-Gómez B; Salas-Trejo D; Pérez-Cortés JC
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2014 Sep; 116(2):105-15. PubMed ID: 24636804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The inter-observer variability of breast density scoring between mammography technologists and breast radiologists and its effect on the rate of adjuvant ultrasound.
Mazor RD; Savir A; Gheorghiu D; Weinstein Y; Abadi-Korek I; Shabshin N
Eur J Radiol; 2016 May; 85(5):957-62. PubMed ID: 27130056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Inter-reader Variability in the Use of BI-RADS Descriptors for Suspicious Findings on Diagnostic Mammography: A Multi-institution Study of 10 Academic Radiologists.
Lee AY; Wisner DJ; Aminololama-Shakeri S; Arasu VA; Feig SA; Hargreaves J; Ojeda-Fournier H; Bassett LW; Wells CJ; De Guzman J; Flowers CI; Campbell JE; Elson SL; Retallack H; Joe BN
Acad Radiol; 2017 Jan; 24(1):60-66. PubMed ID: 27793579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.
Henderson LM; Benefield T; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Durham DD; Yankaskas BC; Bowling JM
Acad Radiol; 2015 Mar; 22(3):278-89. PubMed ID: 25435185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Statistical evaluation of a fully automated mammographic breast density algorithm.
Abdolell M; Tsuruda K; Schaller G; Caines J
Comput Math Methods Med; 2013; 2013():651091. PubMed ID: 23737861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Imperfect correlation of mammographic and clinical breast tissue density.
Alipour S; Bayani L; Saberi A; Alikhassi A; Hosseini L; Eslami B
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2013; 14(6):3685-8. PubMed ID: 23886166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Impact of the new density reporting laws: radiologist perceptions and actual behavior.
Gur D; Klym AH; King JL; Bandos AI; Sumkin JH
Acad Radiol; 2015 Jun; 22(6):679-83. PubMed ID: 25837723
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Women's features and inter-/intra-rater agreement on mammographic density assessment in full-field digital mammograms (DDM-SPAIN).
Pérez-Gómez B; Ruiz F; Martínez I; Casals M; Miranda J; Sánchez-Contador C; Vidal C; Llobet R; Pollán M; Salas D
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2012 Feb; 132(1):287-95. PubMed ID: 22042363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Positive predictive values by mammographic density and screening mode in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program.
Moshina N; Ursin G; Roman M; Sebuødegård S; Hofvind S
Eur J Radiol; 2016 Jan; 85(1):248-254. PubMed ID: 26724673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessment of Interradiologist Agreement Regarding Mammographic Breast Density Classification Using the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas.
Ekpo EU; Ujong UP; Mello-Thoms C; McEntee MF
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 May; 206(5):1119-23. PubMed ID: 26999655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mammographic density and inter-observer variability of pathologic evaluation of core biopsies among women with mammographic abnormalities.
Trocchi P; Ursin G; Kuss O; Ruschke K; Schmidt-Pokrzywniak A; Holzhausen HJ; Löning T; Thomssen C; Böcker W; Kluttig A; Stang A
BMC Cancer; 2012 Nov; 12():554. PubMed ID: 23176326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
