185 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34421215)
41. Deep learning networks find unique mammographic differences in previous negative mammograms between interval and screen-detected cancers: a case-case study.
Hinton B; Ma L; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Malkov S; Fan B; Greenwood H; Joe B; Lee V; Kerlikowske K; Shepherd J
Cancer Imaging; 2019 Jun; 19(1):41. PubMed ID: 31228956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Application of artificial intelligence-based computer-assisted diagnosis on synthetic mammograms from breast tomosynthesis: comparison with digital mammograms.
Lee SE; Han K; Kim EK
Eur Radiol; 2021 Sep; 31(9):6929-6937. PubMed ID: 33710372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters.
Duijm LE; Groenewoud JH; Fracheboud J; de Koning HJ
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2007 Aug; 99(15):1162-70. PubMed ID: 17652282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms.
Lerman C; Trock B; Rimer BK; Boyce A; Jepson C; Engstrom PF
Ann Intern Med; 1991 Apr; 114(8):657-61. PubMed ID: 2003712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Breast cancer: new technologies for risk assessment and diagnosis.
Wright T; McGechan A
Mol Diagn; 2003; 7(1):49-55. PubMed ID: 14529321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Tumor volume doubling time estimated from digital breast tomosynthesis mammograms distinguishes invasive breast cancers from benign lesions.
Sadeghipour N; Tseng J; Anderson K; Ayalasomayajula S; Kozlov A; Ikeda D; DeMartini W; Hori SS
Eur Radiol; 2023 Jan; 33(1):429-439. PubMed ID: 35779088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Breast cancer detected with screening US: reasons for nondetection at mammography.
Bae MS; Moon WK; Chang JM; Koo HR; Kim WH; Cho N; Yi A; Yun BL; Lee SH; Kim MY; Ryu EB; Seo M
Radiology; 2014 Feb; 270(2):369-77. PubMed ID: 24471386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Mutual information-based template matching scheme for detection of breast masses: from mammography to digital breast tomosynthesis.
Mazurowski MA; Lo JY; Harrawood BP; Tourassi GD
J Biomed Inform; 2011 Oct; 44(5):815-23. PubMed ID: 21554985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Effect of observing change from comparison mammograms on performance of screening mammography in a large community-based population.
Yankaskas BC; May RC; Matuszewski J; Bowling JM; Jarman MP; Schroeder BF
Radiology; 2011 Dec; 261(3):762-70. PubMed ID: 22031709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Mammography use, breast cancer stage at diagnosis, and survival among older women.
McCarthy EP; Burns RB; Freund KM; Ash AS; Shwartz M; Marwill SL; Moskowitz MA
J Am Geriatr Soc; 2000 Oct; 48(10):1226-33. PubMed ID: 11037009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. A new method of detecting micro-calcification clusters in mammograms using contourlet transform and non-linking simplified PCNN.
Guo Y; Dong M; Yang Z; Gao X; Wang K; Luo C; Ma Y; Zhang J
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2016 Jul; 130():31-45. PubMed ID: 27208519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Mammography screening using independent double reading with consensus: is there a potential benefit for computer-aided detection?
Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Hofvind S; Jahr G; Castellino RA
Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):241-8. PubMed ID: 22287148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection--prospective evaluation.
Morton MJ; Whaley DH; Brandt KR; Amrami KK
Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):375-83. PubMed ID: 16569779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Missed and true interval and screen-detected breast cancers in a population based screening program.
Hoff SR; Samset JH; Abrahamsen AL; Vigeland E; Klepp O; Hofvind S
Acad Radiol; 2011 Apr; 18(4):454-60. PubMed ID: 21216632
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms.
Elmore JG; Wells CK; Lee CH; Howard DH; Feinstein AR
N Engl J Med; 1994 Dec; 331(22):1493-9. PubMed ID: 7969300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. The efficacy of surgical treatment of breast cancer.
Benjamin DJ
Med Hypotheses; 1996 Nov; 47(5):389-97. PubMed ID: 8951803
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Automatic Breast Mass Segmentation and Classification Using Subtraction of Temporally Sequential Digital Mammograms.
Loizidou K; Skouroumouni G; Nikolaou C; Pitris C
IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med; 2022; 10():1801111. PubMed ID: 36519002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system.
Gur D; Sumkin JH; Rockette HE; Ganott M; Hakim C; Hardesty L; Poller WR; Shah R; Wallace L
J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Feb; 96(3):185-90. PubMed ID: 14759985
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Accuracy of short-interval follow-up mammograms by patient and radiologist characteristics.
Aiello Bowles EJ; Miglioretti DL; Sickles EA; Abraham L; Carney PA; Yankaskas BC; Elmore JG
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 May; 190(5):1200-8. PubMed ID: 18430832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
