119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28139426)
1. Fixated and Not Fixated Regions of Mammograms: A Higher-Order Statistical Analysis of Visual Search Behavior.
Mall S; Brennan P; Mello-Thoms C
Acad Radiol; 2017 Apr; 24(4):442-455. PubMed ID: 28139426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Modeling visual search behavior of breast radiologists using a deep convolution neural network.
Mall S; Brennan PC; Mello-Thoms C
J Med Imaging (Bellingham); 2018 Jul; 5(3):035502. PubMed ID: 30128329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Visual search in breast imaging.
Gandomkar Z; Mello-Thoms C
Br J Radiol; 2019 Oct; 92(1102):20190057. PubMed ID: 31287719
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Can a Machine Learn from Radiologists' Visual Search Behaviour and Their Interpretation of Mammograms-a Deep-Learning Study.
Mall S; Brennan PC; Mello-Thoms C
J Digit Imaging; 2019 Oct; 32(5):746-760. PubMed ID: 31410677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. How does the perception of a lesion influence visual search strategy in mammogram reading?
Mello-Thoms C
Acad Radiol; 2006 Mar; 13(3):275-88. PubMed ID: 16488839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. iCAP: An Individualized Model Combining Gaze Parameters and Image-Based Features to Predict Radiologists' Decisions While Reading Mammograms.
Gandomkar Z; Tay K; Ryder W; Brennan PC; Mello-Thoms C
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2017 May; 36(5):1066-1075. PubMed ID: 28055858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Exploring the potential of context-sensitive CADe in screening mammography.
Tourassi GD; Mazurowski MA; Harrawood BP; Krupinski EA
Med Phys; 2010 Nov; 37(11):5728-36. PubMed ID: 21158284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The perception of breast cancer: what differentiates missed from reported cancers in mammography?
Mello-Thoms C; Dunn S; Nodine CF; Kundel HL; Weinstein SP
Acad Radiol; 2002 Sep; 9(9):1004-12. PubMed ID: 12238541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Fractal analysis of visual search activity for mass detection during mammographic screening.
Alamudun F; Yoon HJ; Hudson KB; Morin-Ducote G; Hammond T; Tourassi GD
Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 44(3):832-846. PubMed ID: 28079249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Kim WH; Chang JM; Koo HR; Seo M; Bae MS; Lee J; Moon WK
Acta Radiol; 2017 Feb; 58(2):148-155. PubMed ID: 27178032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effects of lesion conspicuity on visual search in mammogram reading.
Mello-Thoms C; Hardesty L; Sumkin J; Ganott M; Hakim C; Britton C; Stalder J; Maitz G
Acad Radiol; 2005 Jul; 12(7):830-40. PubMed ID: 16039537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. An investigation of radiologists' perception of lesion similarity: observations with paired breast masses on mammograms and paired lung nodules on CT images.
Kumazawa S; Muramatsu C; Li Q; Li F; Shiraishi J; Caligiuri P; Schmidt RA; MacMahon H; Doi K
Acad Radiol; 2008 Jul; 15(7):887-94. PubMed ID: 18572125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The problem of image interpretation in mammography: effects of lesion conspicuity on the visual search strategy of radiologists.
Mello-Thoms C
Br J Radiol; 2006 Dec; 79 Spec No 2():S111-6. PubMed ID: 17209115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Perception of breast cancer: eye-position analysis of mammogram interpretation.
Mello-Thoms C
Acad Radiol; 2003 Jan; 10(1):4-12. PubMed ID: 12529023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Using computer-extracted image features for modeling of error-making patterns in detection of mammographic masses among radiology residents.
Zhang J; Lo JY; Kuzmiak CM; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Mazurowski MA
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091907. PubMed ID: 25186394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The influence of increased ambient lighting on mass detection in mammograms.
Pollard BJ; Samei E; Chawla AS; Baker J; Ghate S; Kim C; Soo MS; Hashimoto N
Acad Radiol; 2009 Mar; 16(3):299-304. PubMed ID: 19201358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A Probabilistic Model to Support Radiologists' Classification Decisions in Mammography Practice.
Zeng J; Gimenez F; Burnside ES; Rubin DL; Shachter R
Med Decis Making; 2019 Apr; 39(3):208-216. PubMed ID: 30819048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Holistic component of image perception in mammogram interpretation: gaze-tracking study.
Kundel HL; Nodine CF; Conant EF; Weinstein SP
Radiology; 2007 Feb; 242(2):396-402. PubMed ID: 17255410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. "Memory effect" in observer performance studies of mammograms.
Hardesty LA; Ganott MA; Hakim CM; Cohen CS; Clearfield RJ; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 2005 Mar; 12(3):286-90. PubMed ID: 15766687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
