123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29036067)
1. Analyzing visual-search observers using eye-tracking data for digital breast tomosynthesis images.
Jiang Z; Das M; Gifford HC
J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis; 2017 Jun; 34(6):838-845. PubMed ID: 29036067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Visual-search observers for assessing tomographic x-ray image quality.
Gifford HC; Liang Z; Das M
Med Phys; 2016 Mar; 43(3):1563-75. PubMed ID: 26936739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Characterization of masses in digital breast tomosynthesis: comparison of machine learning in projection views and reconstructed slices.
Chan HP; Wu YT; Sahiner B; Wei J; Helvie MA; Zhang Y; Moore RH; Kopans DB; Hadjiiski L; Way T
Med Phys; 2010 Jul; 37(7):3576-86. PubMed ID: 20831065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. X-ray scatter correction in breast tomosynthesis with a precomputed scatter map library.
Feng SS; D'Orsi CJ; Newell MS; Seidel RL; Patel B; Sechopoulos I
Med Phys; 2014 Mar; 41(3):031912. PubMed ID: 24593730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of a variable dose acquisition technique for microcalcification and mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis.
Das M; Gifford HC; O'Connor JM; Glick SJ
Med Phys; 2009 Jun; 36(6):1976-84. PubMed ID: 19610286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The simulation of 3D mass models in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
Shaheen E; De Keyzer F; Bosmans H; Dance DR; Young KC; Van Ongeval C
Med Phys; 2014 Aug; 41(8):081913. PubMed ID: 25086544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study.
Gur D; Abrams GS; Chough DM; Ganott MA; Hakim CM; Perrin RL; Rathfon GY; Sumkin JH; Zuley ML; Bandos AI
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Aug; 193(2):586-91. PubMed ID: 19620460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Transfer Learning From Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Diagnosis: A Comparison of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Full-Field Digital Mammography.
Mendel K; Li H; Sheth D; Giger M
Acad Radiol; 2019 Jun; 26(6):735-743. PubMed ID: 30076083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis: Deep convolutional neural network with transfer learning from mammography.
Samala RK; Chan HP; Hadjiiski L; Helvie MA; Wei J; Cha K
Med Phys; 2016 Dec; 43(12):6654. PubMed ID: 27908154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images.
Skaane P; Bandos AI; Eben EB; Jebsen IN; Krager M; Haakenaasen U; Ekseth U; Izadi M; Hofvind S; Gullien R
Radiology; 2014 Jun; 271(3):655-63. PubMed ID: 24484063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Lesion detectability in 2D-mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using different targets and observers.
Elangovan P; Mackenzie A; Dance DR; Young KC; Wells K
Phys Med Biol; 2018 May; 63(9):095014. PubMed ID: 29637906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of a stationary digital breast tomosynthesis system to magnified 2D mammography using breast tissue specimens.
Tucker AW; Calliste J; Gidcumb EM; Wu J; Kuzmiak CM; Hyun N; Zeng D; Lu J; Zhou O; Lee YZ
Acad Radiol; 2014 Dec; 21(12):1547-52. PubMed ID: 25172412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Combination of one-view digital breast tomosynthesis with one-view digital mammography versus standard two-view digital mammography: per lesion analysis.
Gennaro G; Hendrick RE; Toledano A; Paquelet JR; Bezzon E; Chersevani R; di Maggio C; La Grassa M; Pescarini L; Polico I; Proietti A; Baldan E; Pomerri F; Muzzio PC
Eur Radiol; 2013 Aug; 23(8):2087-94. PubMed ID: 23620367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison between two-dimensional synthetic mammography reconstructed from digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of T1 breast cancer.
Choi JS; Han BK; Ko EY; Ko ES; Hahn SY; Shin JH; Kim MJ
Eur Radiol; 2016 Aug; 26(8):2538-46. PubMed ID: 26628063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Digital breast tomosynthesis versus full-field digital mammography: comparison of the accuracy of lesion measurement and characterization using specimens.
Seo N; Kim HH; Shin HJ; Cha JH; Kim H; Moon JH; Gong G; Ahn SH; Son BH
Acta Radiol; 2014 Jul; 55(6):661-7. PubMed ID: 24005560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. On the correlation between second order texture features and human observer detection performance in digital images.
Nisbett WH; Kavuri A; Das M
Sci Rep; 2020 Aug; 10(1):13510. PubMed ID: 32782415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. New reconstruction algorithm for digital breast tomosynthesis: better image quality for humans and computers.
Rodriguez-Ruiz A; Teuwen J; Vreemann S; Bouwman RW; van Engen RE; Karssemeijer N; Mann RM; Gubern-Merida A; Sechopoulos I
Acta Radiol; 2018 Sep; 59(9):1051-1059. PubMed ID: 29254355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Computerized mass detection for digital breast tomosynthesis directly from the projection images.
Reiser I; Nishikawa RM; Giger ML; Wu T; Rafferty EA; Moore R; Kopans DB
Med Phys; 2006 Feb; 33(2):482-91. PubMed ID: 16532956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Computer aided detection of masses in mammography using subregion Hotelling observers.
Baydush AH; Catarious DM; Abbey CK; Floyd CE
Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1781-7. PubMed ID: 12906196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
