154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34132495)
1. Application of deep learning in the detection of breast lesions with four different breast densities.
Li H; Ye J; Liu H; Wang Y; Shi B; Chen J; Kong A; Xu Q; Cai J
Cancer Med; 2021 Jul; 10(14):4994-5000. PubMed ID: 34132495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Computer-aided detection of breast masses: four-view strategy for screening mammography.
Wei J; Chan HP; Zhou C; Wu YT; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Roubidoux MA; Helvie MA
Med Phys; 2011 Apr; 38(4):1867-76. PubMed ID: 21626920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Impact of breast density on computer-aided detection (CAD) of breast cancer].
Yang KY; Liu XJ; Zhai RY
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2012 May; 34(5):360-3. PubMed ID: 22883457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Impact of compressed breast thickness and dose on lesion detectability in digital mammography: FROC study with simulated lesions in real mammograms.
Salvagnini E; Bosmans H; Van Ongeval C; Van Steen A; Michielsen K; Cockmartin L; Struelens L; Marshall NW
Med Phys; 2016 Sep; 43(9):5104. PubMed ID: 27587041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Diagnostic value of full-field digital mammography for breast carcinoma].
Ding JH; Peng WJ; Jiang ZX; Xu LH; Hu DT; Zheng XJ
Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi; 2009 Nov; 31(11):854-7. PubMed ID: 20137352
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Combining two mammographic projections in a computer aided mass detection method.
van Engeland S; Karssemeijer N
Med Phys; 2007 Mar; 34(3):898-905. PubMed ID: 17441235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A pilot study of radiomics technology based on X-ray mammography in patients with triple-negative breast cancer.
Zhang HX; Sun ZQ; Cheng YG; Mao GQ
J Xray Sci Technol; 2019; 27(3):485-492. PubMed ID: 31081797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of a Deep Learning Risk Score and Standard Mammographic Density Score for Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.
Dembrower K; Liu Y; Azizpour H; Eklund M; Smith K; Lindholm P; Strand F
Radiology; 2020 Feb; 294(2):265-272. PubMed ID: 31845842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A YOLO-based AI system for classifying calcifications on spot magnification mammograms.
Chen JL; Cheng LH; Wang J; Hsu TW; Chen CY; Tseng LM; Guo SM
Biomed Eng Online; 2023 May; 22(1):54. PubMed ID: 37237394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Breast lesion detection and classification: comparison of screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading--observer performance study.
Skaane P; Balleyguier C; Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Piguet JC; Young K; Niklason LT
Radiology; 2005 Oct; 237(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 16100086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Understanding Clinical Mammographic Breast Density Assessment: a Deep Learning Perspective.
Mohamed AA; Luo Y; Peng H; Jankowitz RC; Wu S
J Digit Imaging; 2018 Aug; 31(4):387-392. PubMed ID: 28932980
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Deep learning modeling using normal mammograms for predicting breast cancer risk.
Arefan D; Mohamed AA; Berg WA; Zuley ML; Sumkin JH; Wu S
Med Phys; 2020 Jan; 47(1):110-118. PubMed ID: 31667873
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Application of mammography-based radiomics signature for preoperative prediction of triple-negative breast cancer.
Ge S; Yixing Y; Jia D; Ling Y
BMC Med Imaging; 2022 Sep; 22(1):166. PubMed ID: 36104679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of breast amorphous calcifications by a computer-aided detection system in full-field digital mammography.
Scaranelo AM; Eiada R; Bukhanov K; Crystal P
Br J Radiol; 2012 May; 85(1013):517-22. PubMed ID: 22556404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparison of radiologist performance with photon-counting full-field digital mammography to conventional full-field digital mammography.
Cole EB; Toledano AY; Lundqvist M; Pisano ED
Acad Radiol; 2012 Aug; 19(8):916-22. PubMed ID: 22537503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Breast cancer detection rates using four different types of mammography detectors.
Mackenzie A; Warren LM; Wallis MG; Cooke J; Given-Wilson RM; Dance DR; Chakraborty DP; Halling-Brown MD; Looney PT; Young KC
Eur Radiol; 2016 Mar; 26(3):874-83. PubMed ID: 26105023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A deep learning model integrating mammography and clinical factors facilitates the malignancy prediction of BI-RADS 4 microcalcifications in breast cancer screening.
Liu H; Chen Y; Zhang Y; Wang L; Luo R; Wu H; Wu C; Zhang H; Tan W; Yin H; Wang D
Eur Radiol; 2021 Aug; 31(8):5902-5912. PubMed ID: 33496829
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Computer-Aided Diagnosis in Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening of Women With Extremely Dense Breasts to Reduce False-Positive Diagnoses.
Verburg E; van Gils CH; Bakker MF; Viergever MA; Pijnappel RM; Veldhuis WB; Gilhuijs KGA
Invest Radiol; 2020 Jul; 55(7):438-444. PubMed ID: 32149858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An Ad Hoc Random Initialization Deep Neural Network Architecture for Discriminating Malignant Breast Cancer Lesions in Mammographic Images.
Duggento A; Aiello M; Cavaliere C; Cascella GL; Cascella D; Conte G; Guerrisi M; Toschi N
Contrast Media Mol Imaging; 2019; 2019():5982834. PubMed ID: 31249497
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
