100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8168065)
21. Using computer-extracted image features for modeling of error-making patterns in detection of mammographic masses among radiology residents.
Zhang J; Lo JY; Kuzmiak CM; Ghate SV; Yoon SC; Mazurowski MA
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091907. PubMed ID: 25186394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Automated analysis of mammographic densities and breast carcinoma risk.
Byng JW; Yaffe MJ; Lockwood GA; Little LE; Tritchler DL; Boyd NF
Cancer; 1997 Jul; 80(1):66-74. PubMed ID: 9210710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Using tissue texture surrounding calcification clusters to predict benign vs malignant outcomes.
Thiele DL; Kimme-Smith C; Johnson TD; McCombs M; Bassett LW
Med Phys; 1996 Apr; 23(4):549-55. PubMed ID: 9157269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A method to test the reproducibility and to improve performance of computer-aided detection schemes for digitized mammograms.
Zheng B; Gur D; Good WF; Hardesty LA
Med Phys; 2004 Nov; 31(11):2964-72. PubMed ID: 15587648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Fractal modeling and segmentation for the enhancement of microcalcifications in digital mammograms.
Li H; Liu KJ; Lo SC
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 1997 Dec; 16(6):785-98. PubMed ID: 9533579
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Multi-scaled morphological features for the characterization of mammographic masses using statistical classification schemes.
Georgiou H; Mavroforakis M; Dimitropoulos N; Cavouras D; Theodoridis S
Artif Intell Med; 2007 Sep; 41(1):39-55. PubMed ID: 17714924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Computer-assisted diagnosis: the classification of mammographic breast parenchymal patterns.
Tahoces PG; Correa J; Souto M; Gómez L; Vidal JJ
Phys Med Biol; 1995 Jan; 40(1):103-17. PubMed ID: 7708834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. [Fractal analysis of a breast carcinoma--presentation of a modern morphometric method].
Sedivy R; Windischberger C
Wien Med Wochenschr; 1998; 148(14):335-7. PubMed ID: 9816645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Breast image pre-processing for mammographic tissue segmentation.
He W; Hogg P; Juette A; Denton ER; Zwiggelaar R
Comput Biol Med; 2015 Dec; 67():61-73. PubMed ID: 26498046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Parenchymal texture analysis in digital mammography: A fully automated pipeline for breast cancer risk assessment.
Zheng Y; Keller BM; Ray S; Wang Y; Conant EF; Gee JC; Kontos D
Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):4149-60. PubMed ID: 26133615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Detection of breast masses in mammograms by density slicing and texture flow-field analysis.
Mudigonda NR; Rangayyan RM; Desautels JE
IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2001 Dec; 20(12):1215-27. PubMed ID: 11811822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Computer-aided detection of breast masses on full field digital mammograms.
Wei J; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Chan HP; Petrick N; Helvie MA; Roubidoux MA; Ge J; Zhou C
Med Phys; 2005 Sep; 32(9):2827-38. PubMed ID: 16266097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. A fully automated scheme for mammographic segmentation and classification based on breast density and asymmetry.
Tzikopoulos SD; Mavroforakis ME; Georgiou HV; Dimitropoulos N; Theodoridis S
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2011 Apr; 102(1):47-63. PubMed ID: 21306782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Mammographic pattern analysis: an emerging risk assessment tool.
Karellas A
Acad Radiol; 2007 May; 14(5):511-2. PubMed ID: 17434063
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Mammographic texture and risk of breast cancer by tumor type and estrogen receptor status.
Malkov S; Shepherd JA; Scott CG; Tamimi RM; Ma L; Bertrand KA; Couch F; Jensen MR; Mahmoudzadeh AP; Fan B; Norman A; Brandt KR; Pankratz VS; Vachon CM; Kerlikowske K
Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Dec; 18(1):122. PubMed ID: 27923387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Characterisation of mammographic parenchymal pattern by fractal dimension.
Caldwell CB; Stapleton SJ; Holdsworth DW; Jong RA; Weiser WJ; Cooke G; Yaffe MJ
Phys Med Biol; 1990 Feb; 35(2):235-47. PubMed ID: 2315379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Computerized nipple identification for multiple image analysis in computer-aided diagnosis.
Zhou C; Chan HP; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Petrick N
Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2871-82. PubMed ID: 15543797
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Full-field digital mammographic interpretation with prior analog versus prior digitized analog mammography: time for interpretation.
Garg AS; Rapelyea JA; Rechtman LR; Torrente J; Bittner RB; Coffey CM; Brem RF
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Jun; 196(6):1436-8. PubMed ID: 21606310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. GPCALMA: implementation in Italian hospitals of a computer aided detection system for breast lesions by mammography examination.
Lauria A
Phys Med; 2009 Jun; 25(2):58-72. PubMed ID: 18602854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Evaluation of a New Ensemble Learning Framework for Mass Classification in Mammograms.
Rahmani Seryasat O; Haddadnia J
Clin Breast Cancer; 2018 Jun; 18(3):e407-e420. PubMed ID: 29141776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
