114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8539365)
1. Artificial neural network: improving the quality of breast biopsy recommendations.
Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Lo JY; Floyd CE
Radiology; 1996 Jan; 198(1):131-5. PubMed ID: 8539365
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Breast cancer: prediction with artificial neural network based on BI-RADS standardized lexicon.
Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Lo JY; Williford ME; Floyd CE
Radiology; 1995 Sep; 196(3):817-22. PubMed ID: 7644649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description.
Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Floyd CE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1996 Apr; 166(4):773-8. PubMed ID: 8610547
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Predicting breast cancer invasion with artificial neural networks on the basis of mammographic features.
Lo JY; Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Iglehart JD; Floyd CE
Radiology; 1997 Apr; 203(1):159-63. PubMed ID: 9122385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value.
Lazarus E; Mainiero MB; Schepps B; Koelliker SL; Livingston LS
Radiology; 2006 May; 239(2):385-91. PubMed ID: 16569780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Computer-aided classification of breast masses: performance and interobserver variability of expert radiologists versus residents.
Singh S; Maxwell J; Baker JA; Nicholas JL; Lo JY
Radiology; 2011 Jan; 258(1):73-80. PubMed ID: 20971779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effect of patient history data on the prediction of breast cancer from mammographic findings with artificial neural networks.
Lo JY; Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Floyd CE
Acad Radiol; 1999 Jan; 6(1):10-5. PubMed ID: 9891147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A comparison of logistic regression analysis and an artificial neural network using the BI-RADS lexicon for ultrasonography in conjunction with introbserver variability.
Kim SM; Han H; Park JM; Choi YJ; Yoon HS; Sohn JH; Baek MH; Kim YN; Chae YM; June JJ; Lee J; Jeon YH
J Digit Imaging; 2012 Oct; 25(5):599-606. PubMed ID: 22270787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System.
Kerlikowske K; Grady D; Barclay J; Frankel SD; Ominsky SH; Sickles EA; Ernster V
J Natl Cancer Inst; 1998 Dec; 90(23):1801-9. PubMed ID: 9839520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Neural network analysis of breast cancer from MRI findings.
Abdolmaleki P; Buadu LD; Murayama S; Murakami J; Hashiguchi N; Yabuuchi H; Masuda K
Radiat Med; 1997; 15(5):283-93. PubMed ID: 9445150
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Assessing Breast Cancer Risk with an Artificial Neural Network.
Sepandi M; Taghdir M; Rezaianzadeh A; Rahimikazerooni S
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2018 Apr; 19(4):1017-1019. PubMed ID: 29693975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Impact of missing data in evaluating artificial neural networks trained on complete data.
Markey MK; Tourassi GD; Margolis M; DeLong DM
Comput Biol Med; 2006 May; 36(5):516-25. PubMed ID: 15893745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Computer-aided diagnosis of breast cancer: artificial neural network approach for optimized merging of mammographic features.
Lo JY; Baker JA; Kornguth PJ; Floyd CE
Acad Radiol; 1995 Oct; 2(10):841-50. PubMed ID: 9419649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Does training in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations or feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography?
Berg WA; D'Orsi CJ; Jackson VP; Bassett LW; Beam CA; Lewis RS; Crewson PE
Radiology; 2002 Sep; 224(3):871-80. PubMed ID: 12202727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection: pilot clinical trial.
Helvie MA; Hadjiiski L; Makariou E; Chan HP; Petrick N; Sahiner B; Lo SC; Freedman M; Adler D; Bailey J; Blane C; Hoff D; Hunt K; Joynt L; Klein K; Paramagul C; Patterson SK; Roubidoux MA
Radiology; 2004 Apr; 231(1):208-14. PubMed ID: 14990808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Artificial Neural Networks for differential diagnosis of breast lesions in MR-Mammography: a systematic approach addressing the influence of network architecture on diagnostic performance using a large clinical database.
Dietzel M; Baltzer PA; Dietzel A; Zoubi R; Gröschel T; Burmeister HP; Bogdan M; Kaiser WA
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Jul; 81(7):1508-13. PubMed ID: 21459533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prediction of breast cancer malignancy using an artificial neural network.
Floyd CE; Lo JY; Yun AJ; Sullivan DC; Kornguth PJ
Cancer; 1994 Dec; 74(11):2944-8. PubMed ID: 7954258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reader variability in reporting breast imaging according to BI-RADS assessment categories (the Florence experience).
Ciatto S; Houssami N; Apruzzese A; Bassetti E; Brancato B; Carozzi F; Catarzi S; Lamberini MP; Marcelli G; Pellizzoni R; Pesce B; Risso G; Russo F; Scorsolini A
Breast; 2006 Feb; 15(1):44-51. PubMed ID: 16076556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Breast cancer CADx based on BI-RAds descriptors from two mammographic views.
Gupta S; Chyn PF; Markey MK
Med Phys; 2006 Jun; 33(6):1810-7. PubMed ID: 16872088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment.
Berg WA; Campassi C; Langenberg P; Sexton MJ
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2000 Jun; 174(6):1769-77. PubMed ID: 10845521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
