These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

99 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8208220)

  • 1. Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: automated alignment of breast images and its effect on bilateral-subtraction technique.
    Yin FF; Giger ML; Doi K; Vyborny CJ; Schmidt RA
    Med Phys; 1994 Mar; 21(3):445-52. PubMed ID: 8208220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: analysis of bilateral subtraction images.
    Yin FF; Giger ML; Doi K; Metz CE; Vyborny CJ; Schmidt RA
    Med Phys; 1991; 18(5):955-63. PubMed ID: 1961160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A regional registration technique for automated interval change analysis of breast lesions on mammograms.
    Sanjay-Gopal S; Chan HP; Wilson T; Helvie M; Petrick N; Sahiner B
    Med Phys; 1999 Dec; 26(12):2669-79. PubMed ID: 10619252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of bilateral-subtraction and single-image processing techniques in the computerized detection of mammographic masses.
    Yin FF; Giger ML; Vyborny CJ; Doi K; Schmidt RA
    Invest Radiol; 1993 Jun; 28(6):473-81. PubMed ID: 8320064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Computer-aided diagnosis: automatic detection of malignant masses in digitized mammograms.
    Méndez AJ; Tahoces PG; Lado MJ; Souto M; Vidal JJ
    Med Phys; 1998 Jun; 25(6):957-64. PubMed ID: 9650186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: investigation of feature-analysis techniques.
    Yin FF; Giger ML; Doi K; Vyborny CJ; Schmidt RA
    J Digit Imaging; 1994 Feb; 7(1):18-26. PubMed ID: 8172975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Influence of using manual or automatic breast density information in a mass detection CAD system.
    Oliver A; Lladó X; Freixenet J; Martí R; Pérez E; Pont J; Zwiggelaar R
    Acad Radiol; 2010 Jul; 17(7):877-83. PubMed ID: 20540910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A New Breast Border Extraction and Contrast Enhancement Technique with Digital Mammogram Images for Improved Detection of Breast Cancer.
    Hazarika M; Mahanta LB
    Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2018 Aug; 19(8):2141-2148. PubMed ID: 30139217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of methods for mammogram registration.
    van Engeland S; Snoeren P; Hendriks J; Karssemeijer N
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2003 Nov; 22(11):1436-44. PubMed ID: 14606677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An anatomically oriented breast coordinate system for mammogram analysis.
    Brandt SS; Karemore G; Karssemeijer N; Nielsen M
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2011 Oct; 30(10):1841-51. PubMed ID: 21609879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Detection of masses based on asymmetric regions of digital bilateral mammograms using spatial description with variogram and cross-variogram functions.
    Ericeira DR; Silva AC; de Paiva AC; Gattass M
    Comput Biol Med; 2013 Sep; 43(8):987-99. PubMed ID: 23816171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Computer-aided detection in digital mammography: comparison of craniocaudal, mediolateral oblique, and mediolateral views.
    Kim SJ; Moon WK; Cho N; Cha JH; Kim SM; Im JG
    Radiology; 2006 Dec; 241(3):695-701. PubMed ID: 17114620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Improvement of computerized mass detection on mammograms: fusion of two-view information.
    Paquerault S; Petrick N; Chan HP; Sahiner B; Helvie MA
    Med Phys; 2002 Feb; 29(2):238-47. PubMed ID: 11865995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Computerized detection of masses from digitized mammograms: comparison of single-image segmentation and bilateral-image subtraction.
    Zheng B; Chang YH; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 1995 Dec; 2(12):1056-61. PubMed ID: 9419682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Robust initial detection of landmarks in film-screen mammograms using multiple FFDM atlases.
    Iglesias JE; Karssemeijer N
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2009 Nov; 28(11):1815-24. PubMed ID: 19520632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Automated registration of diagnostic to prediagnostic x-ray mammograms: evaluation and comparison to radiologists' accuracy.
    Pinto Pereira SM; Hipwell JH; McCormack VA; Tanner C; Moss SM; Wilkinson LS; Khoo LA; Pagliari C; Skippage PL; Kliger CJ; Hawkes DJ; Silva IM
    Med Phys; 2010 Sep; 37(9):4530-9. PubMed ID: 20964170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A bilateral analysis scheme for false positive reduction in mammogram mass detection.
    Li Y; Chen H; Yang Y; Cheng L; Cao L
    Comput Biol Med; 2015 Feb; 57():84-95. PubMed ID: 25544726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of similarity measures for the task of template matching of masses on serial mammograms.
    Filev P; Hadjiiski L; Sahiner B; Chan HP; Helvie MA
    Med Phys; 2005 Feb; 32(2):515-29. PubMed ID: 15789598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Multiview-based computer-aided detection scheme for breast masses.
    Zheng B; Leader JK; Abrams GS; Lu AH; Wallace LP; Maitz GS; Gur D
    Med Phys; 2006 Sep; 33(9):3135-43. PubMed ID: 17022205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.