188 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27059785)
21. A self-directed learning intervention for radiographers rating mammographic breast density.
Ekpo EU; Hogg P; Wasike E; McEntee MF
Radiography (Lond); 2017 Nov; 23(4):337-342. PubMed ID: 28965898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. 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]
23. Background echotexture classification in breast ultrasound: inter-observer agreement study.
Kim WH; Lee SH; Chang JM; Cho N; Moon WK
Acta Radiol; 2017 Dec; 58(12):1427-1433. PubMed ID: 28273746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Using an automated measure of breast density to explore the association between ethnicity and mammographic density in Australian women.
Bell RJ; Evans J; Fox J; Pridmore V
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2019 Apr; 63(2):183-189. PubMed ID: 30623584
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. Persistent inter-observer variability of breast density assessment using BI-RADS® 5th edition guidelines.
Portnow LH; Georgian-Smith D; Haider I; Barrios M; Bay CP; Nelson KP; Raza S
Clin Imaging; 2022 Mar; 83():21-27. PubMed ID: 34952487
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Automated mammographic breast density estimation using a fully convolutional network.
Lee J; Nishikawa RM
Med Phys; 2018 Mar; 45(3):1178-1190. PubMed ID: 29363774
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Mammographic density measurements are not affected by mammography system.
Damases CN; Brennan PC; McEntee MF
J Med Imaging (Bellingham); 2015 Jan; 2(1):015501. PubMed ID: 26158085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. 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]
31. Mammographic Density Assessment by Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Assisted Diagnosis: A Comparison with Automated Volumetric Assessment.
Lee SE; Son NH; Kim MH; Kim EK
J Digit Imaging; 2022 Apr; 35(2):173-179. PubMed ID: 35015180
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Potential Use of American College of Radiology BI-RADS Mammography Atlas for Reporting and Assessing Lesions Detected on Dedicated Breast CT Imaging: Preliminary Study.
Jung HK; Kuzmiak CM; Kim KW; Choi NM; Kim HJ; Langman EL; Yoon S; Steen D; Zeng D; Gao F
Acad Radiol; 2017 Nov; 24(11):1395-1401. PubMed ID: 28728854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Mammographic signs of potential relevance to breast cancer risk: the agreement of radiologists' classification.
Jong R; Fishell E; Little L; Lockwood G; Boyd NF
Eur J Cancer Prev; 1996 Aug; 5(4):281-6. PubMed ID: 8894565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Inter- and intra-observer variability of qualitative visual breast-composition assessment in mammography among Japanese physicians: a first multi-institutional observer performance study in Japan.
Koyama Y; Nakashima K; Orihara S; Tsunoda H; Kimura F; Uenaka N; Ban K; Michishita Y; Kanemaki Y; Kurihara A; Tawaraya K; Taguri M; Ishikawa T; Uematsu T
Breast Cancer; 2024 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 38619787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. 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]
37. Reproducibility of visual assessment on mammographic density.
Gao J; Warren R; Warren-Forward H; Forbes JF
Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2008 Mar; 108(1):121-7. PubMed ID: 17616811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Design and clinical validation of a software program for automated measurement of mammographic breast density.
Araújo ALC; Soares HB; Carvalho DF; Mendonça RM; Oliveira AG
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2020 Mar; 20(1):45. PubMed ID: 32122371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Impact of Breast Reader Assessment Strategy on mammographic radiologists' test reading performance.
Suleiman WI; Rawashdeh MA; Lewis SJ; McEntee MF; Lee W; Tapia K; Brennan PC
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2016 Jun; 60(3):352-8. PubMed ID: 27062490
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Comparison of Qualitative and Volumetric Assessments of Breast Density and Analyses of Breast Compression Parameters and Breast Volume of Women in Bahcesehir Mammography Screening Project.
Gemici AA; Arıbal E; Özaydın AN; Gürdal SÖ; Özçınar B; Cabioğlu N; Özmen V
Eur J Breast Health; 2020 Apr; 16(2):110-116. PubMed ID: 32285032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
