43 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8134556)
1. Sequential viewing of abdominal CT images at varying rates.
Gur D; Good WF; Oliver JH; Thaete FL; Baron RL; Federle MP; Campbell WL; Rosenthal MS
Radiology; 1994 Apr; 191(1):119-22. PubMed ID: 8134556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Spiral CT of the chest: comparison of cine and film-based viewing.
Seltzer SE; Judy PF; Adams DF; Jacobson FL; Stark P; Kikinis R; Swensson RG; Hooton S; Head B; Feldman U
Radiology; 1995 Oct; 197(1):73-8. PubMed ID: 7568857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improvement of radiologists' characterization of mammographic masses by using computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC study.
Chan HP; Sahiner B; Helvie MA; Petrick N; Roubidoux MA; Wilson TE; Adler DD; Paramagul C; Newman JS; Sanjay-Gopal S
Radiology; 1999 Sep; 212(3):817-27. PubMed ID: 10478252
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Primary CT diagnosis of abdominal masses in a PACS environment.
Straub WH; Gur D; Good WF; Campbell WL; Davis PL; Hecht ST; Skolnick ML; Thaete FL; Rosenthal MS; Sashin D
Radiology; 1991 Mar; 178(3):739-43. PubMed ID: 1994411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Remote CT reading using an ultramobile PC and web-based remote viewing over a wireless network.
Choi HJ; Lee JH; Kang BS
J Telemed Telecare; 2012 Jan; 18(1):26-31. PubMed ID: 22067287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effect of image display size on observer performance an assessment of variance components.
Gur D; Klym AH; King JL; Maitz GS; Mello-Thoms C; Rockette HE; Thaete FL
Acad Radiol; 2006 Apr; 13(4):409-13. PubMed ID: 16554219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prediction of perceptible artifacts in JPEG2000 compressed abdomen CT images using a perceptual image quality metric.
Kim B; Lee KH; Kim KJ; Mantiuk R; Bajpai V; Kim TJ; Kim YH; Yoon CJ; Hahn S
Acad Radiol; 2008 Mar; 15(3):314-25. PubMed ID: 18280929
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Liver lesions: manganese-enhanced MR and dual-phase helical CT for preoperative detection and characterization comparison with receiver operating characteristic analysis.
Braga HJ; Choti MA; Lee VS; Paulson EK; Siegelman ES; Bluemke DA
Radiology; 2002 May; 223(2):525-31. PubMed ID: 11997563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Hard-copy (film) versus soft-copy (CRT) reading performance between compressed and uncompressed images: SOLs in abdominal CT images].
Ando Y; Tsukamoto N; Kawaguchi O; Kitamura M; Kunieda E; Kubo A; Ogasawara K; Kinosada Y; Maeda T; Kozuka T
Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1999 Sep; 59(11):521-5. PubMed ID: 10536448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Investigation of optimal viewing size for detecting nodular ground-glass opacity on high-resolution computed tomography with cine-mode display.
Yamaguchi M; Bessho Y; Inoue T; Asai Y; Matsumoto T; Murase K
Radiol Phys Technol; 2011 Jan; 4(1):13-8. PubMed ID: 20820964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Lossy 3D JPEG2000 compression of abdominal CT images in patients with acute abdominal complaints: effect of compression ratio on diagnostic confidence and accuracy.
Ringl H; Schernthaner R; Sala E; El-Rabadi K; Weber M; Schima W; Herold CJ; Dixon AK
Radiology; 2008 Aug; 248(2):476-84. PubMed ID: 18641251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Detection of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: MR imaging versus angiographically assisted helical CT.
Kanematsu M; Hoshi H; Murakami T; Inaba Y; Kim T; Yamada T; Kato M; Yokoyama R; Nakamura H
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 Dec; 169(6):1507-15. PubMed ID: 9393154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques.
Singh S; Kalra MK; Hsieh J; Licato PE; Do S; Pien HH; Blake MA
Radiology; 2010 Nov; 257(2):373-83. PubMed ID: 20829535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cine viewing of abdominal CT.
Tazawa S; Gotoh Y; Takahashi S; Zuguchi M; Maruoka S
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2001 Jul; 66(1):105-10. PubMed ID: 11378231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Use of compressed images for medical checkups: comparison between radiologists' subjective quality assessment and diagnostic usefulness].
Sugiyama N; Igarashi Y; Kohda E; Kohno A; Suzuki S; Tanaka T; Chiyasu S; Yokokura T
Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 2005 Oct; 65(4):359-67. PubMed ID: 16334387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. CT of the chest and abdomen in patients on mechanical pulmonary ventilators: quality of images made at 0.6 vs 1.0 sec.
Posniak HV; Olson MC; Demos TC; Pierce KL; Kalbhen CL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Nov; 163(5):1073-7. PubMed ID: 7976877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The use of continuous and discrete confidence judgments in receiver operating characteristic studies of diagnostic imaging techniques.
Rockette HE; Gur D; Metz CE
Invest Radiol; 1992 Feb; 27(2):169-72. PubMed ID: 1601610
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Observer variation in bone lesion detection in thoraco-abdominal visceral CT images.
Laval-Jeantet M; Paxton L; Frija J; Prêteux F
Eur J Radiol; 1985 Nov; 5(4):310-2. PubMed ID: 4085495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Quadtree-based data compression of abdominal CT images.
Halpern EJ; Levy HM; Newhouse JH; Amis ES; Sanders LM; Mun IK
Invest Radiol; 1990 Jan; 25(1):31-8. PubMed ID: 2298547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of fixed and adjustable window width and level settings in the CT evaluation of diffuse lung disease.
Maguire WM; Herman PG; Khan A; Smith RH; Noma S; Eacobacci TM; Barlev DM; Mandell N; Sunshine A; Carlin M
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 1993; 17(6):847-52. PubMed ID: 8227567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
