These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

181 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28965898)

  • 41. Mammographic Breast Density Assessment Using Automated Volumetric Software and Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) Categorization by Expert Radiologists.
    Damases CN; Brennan PC; Mello-Thoms C; McEntee MF
    Acad Radiol; 2016 Jan; 23(1):70-7. PubMed ID: 26514436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Breast tomosynthesis for the clarification of mammographic BI-RADS 3 lesions can decrease follow-up examinations and enables immediate cancer diagnosis.
    Bahrs SD; Otto V; Hattermann V; Klumpp B; Hahn M; Nikolaou K; Siegmann-Luz K
    Acta Radiol; 2018 Oct; 59(10):1176-1183. PubMed ID: 29451022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Radiologist assessment of breast density by BI-RADS categories versus fully automated volumetric assessment.
    Gweon HM; Youk JH; Kim JA; Son EJ
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2013 Sep; 201(3):692-7. PubMed ID: 23971465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.
    Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS
    Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Breast cancer CADx based on BI-RAds descriptors from two mammographic views.
    Gupta S; Chyn PF; Markey MK
    Med Phys; 2006 Jun; 33(6):1810-7. PubMed ID: 16872088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Comparison of inter- and intra-observer variability of breast density assessments using the fourth and fifth editions of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System.
    Alikhassi A; Esmaili Gourabi H; Baikpour M
    Eur J Radiol Open; 2018; 5():67-72. PubMed ID: 29707614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Breast Cancer Risk and Mammographic Density Assessed with Semiautomated and Fully Automated Methods and BI-RADS.
    Jeffers AM; Sieh W; Lipson JA; Rothstein JH; McGuire V; Whittemore AS; Rubin DL
    Radiology; 2017 Feb; 282(2):348-355. PubMed ID: 27598536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Mammographic density: Comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset.
    Sacchetto D; Morra L; Agliozzo S; Bernardi D; Björklund T; Brancato B; Bravetti P; Carbonaro LA; Correale L; Fantò C; Favettini E; Martincich L; Milanesio L; Mombelloni S; Monetti F; Morrone D; Pellegrini M; Pesce B; Petrillo A; Saguatti G; Stevanin C; Trimboli RM; Tuttobene P; Valentini M; Marra V; Frigerio A; Bert A; Sardanelli F
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Jan; 26(1):175-83. PubMed ID: 25929945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Interpretation of automated breast ultrasound (ABUS) with and without knowledge of mammography: a reader performance study.
    Skaane P; Gullien R; Eben EB; Sandhaug M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Stoeblen F
    Acta Radiol; 2015 Apr; 56(4):404-12. PubMed ID: 24682405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Diagnostic accuracy of automated ACR BI-RADS breast density classification using deep convolutional neural networks.
    Sexauer R; Hejduk P; Borkowski K; Ruppert C; Weikert T; Dellas S; Schmidt N
    Eur Radiol; 2023 Jul; 33(7):4589-4596. PubMed ID: 36856841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Observer variability of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) for breast ultrasound.
    Lee HJ; Kim EK; Kim MJ; Youk JH; Lee JY; Kang DR; Oh KK
    Eur J Radiol; 2008 Feb; 65(2):293-8. PubMed ID: 17531417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Inter- and Intra-Observer Agreement in Ultrasound BI-RADS Classification and Real-Time Elastography Tsukuba Score Assessment of Breast Lesions.
    Schwab F; Redling K; Siebert M; Schötzau A; Schoenenberger CA; Zanetti-Dällenbach R
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2016 Nov; 42(11):2622-2629. PubMed ID: 27503826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Mammography: interobserver variability in breast density assessment.
    Ooms EA; Zonderland HM; Eijkemans MJ; Kriege M; Mahdavian Delavary B; Burger CW; Ansink AC
    Breast; 2007 Dec; 16(6):568-76. PubMed ID: 18035541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Assessment of breast positioning criteria in mammographic screening: Agreement between artificial intelligence software and radiographers.
    Waade GG; Danielsen AS; Holen ÅS; Larsen M; Hanestad B; Hopland NM; Kalcheva V; Hofvind S
    J Med Screen; 2021 Dec; 28(4):448-455. PubMed ID: 33715511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Are All Views with and without Displacement Maneuver Necessary in Augmentation Mammography? Putting Numbers Into Perspective.
    Couto LS; Freitas-Junior R; Corrêa RS; Lauar MV; Bauab SP; Urban LABD; Cruvinel-Filho JLO; Soares LR; Savaris RF
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2022 Jan; 23(1):233-239. PubMed ID: 35092393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Evaluation of mammographic density patterns: reproducibility and concordance among scales.
    Garrido-Estepa M; Ruiz-Perales F; Miranda J; Ascunce N; González-Román I; Sánchez-Contador C; Santamariña C; Moreo P; Vidal C; Peris M; Moreno MP; Váquez-Carrete JA; Collado-García F; Casanova F; Ederra M; Salas D; Pollán M;
    BMC Cancer; 2010 Sep; 10():485. PubMed ID: 20836850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Nonmasslike enhancement at breast MR imaging: the added value of mammography and US for lesion categorization.
    Thomassin-Naggara I; Trop I; Chopier J; David J; Lalonde L; Darai E; Rouzier R; Uzan S
    Radiology; 2011 Oct; 261(1):69-79. PubMed ID: 21771958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. [Validity and reliability of mammographic interpretation by Mexican radiologists, using the BI-RADS system].
    Torres-Mejía G; Villaseñor-Navarro Y; Yunes-Díaz E; Angeles-Llerenas A; Martínez-Montañez OG; Lazcano-Ponce E
    Rev Invest Clin; 2011; 63(2):124-34. PubMed ID: 21717719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. 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]  

  • 60. An investigation of radiographers' and radiologists' perceptions and attitudes in Kuwait towards extending radiographers' role in mammography.
    Muhanna AM; Brown PN; Pratt S
    Radiography (Lond); 2022 May; 28(2):325-332. PubMed ID: 34782216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.