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 *

177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9017014)

  • 41. Comparison of LCD and CRT displays based on efficacy for digital mammography.
    Saunders RS; Samei E; Baker J; Delong D; Soo MS; Walsh R; Pisano E; Kuzmiak CM; Pavic D
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Nov; 13(11):1317-26. PubMed ID: 17070449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Investigating the link between radiologists' gaze, diagnostic decision, and image content.
    Tourassi G; Voisin S; Paquit V; Krupinski E
    J Am Med Inform Assoc; 2013; 20(6):1067-75. PubMed ID: 23788627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. A review of factors influencing radiologists' visual search behaviour.
    Ganesan A; Alakhras M; Brennan PC; Mello-Thoms C
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2018 Dec; 62(6):747-757. PubMed ID: 30198628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Do mammographic technologists affect radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretative performance?
    Henderson LM; Benefield T; Bowling JM; Durham DD; Marsh MW; Schroeder BF; Yankaskas BC
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2015 Apr; 204(4):903-8. PubMed ID: 25794085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Correspondence in texture features between two mammographic views.
    Gupta S; Markey MK
    Med Phys; 2005 Jun; 32(6):1598-606. PubMed ID: 16013719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. 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]  

  • 47. Spectral phase based medical image processing.
    Kothapalli SR; Yelleswarapu CS; Naraharisetty SG; Wu P; Rao DV
    Acad Radiol; 2005 Jun; 12(6):708-21. PubMed ID: 15935969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Assessing Resident Performance in Screening Mammography: Development of a Quantitative Algorithm.
    Lewis PJ; Rooney TB; Frazee TE; Poplack SP
    Acad Radiol; 2018 May; 25(5):659-664. PubMed ID: 29366681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Visual-search observers for assessing tomographic x-ray image quality.
    Gifford HC; Liang Z; Das M
    Med Phys; 2016 Mar; 43(3):1563-75. PubMed ID: 26936739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. An observer study for a computer-aided reading protocol (CARP) in the screening environment for digital mammography.
    Moin P; Deshpande R; Sayre J; Messer E; Gupte S; Romsdahl H; Hasegawa A; Liu BJ
    Acad Radiol; 2011 Nov; 18(11):1420-9. PubMed ID: 21971259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Identification of simulated microcalcifications in white noise and mammographic backgrounds.
    Reiser I; Nishikawa RM
    Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2905-11. PubMed ID: 16964867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Impact of prior mammograms on combined reading of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Kim WH; Chang JM; Koo HR; Seo M; Bae MS; Lee J; Moon WK
    Acta Radiol; 2017 Feb; 58(2):148-155. PubMed ID: 27178032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Does Breast Imaging Experience During Residency Translate Into Improved Initial Performance in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis?
    Zhang J; Grimm LJ; Lo JY; Johnson KS; Ghate SV; Walsh R; Mazurowski MA
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2015 Jul; 12(7):728-32. PubMed ID: 26143567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Digital mammography: computer-assisted diagnosis method for mass detection with multiorientation and multiresolution wavelet transforms.
    Li L; Qian W; Clarke LP
    Acad Radiol; 1997 Nov; 4(11):724-31. PubMed ID: 9365751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Detection of breast cancer by soft-copy reading of digital mammograms: comparison between a routine image-processing parameter and high-contrast parameters.
    Kamitani T; Yabuuchi H; Soeda H; Matsuo Y; Okafuji T; Sakai S; Setoguchi T; Hatakenaka M; Ishii N; Honda H
    Acta Radiol; 2010 Feb; 51(1):15-20. PubMed ID: 19922328
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Technologists' Characteristics and Quality of Positioning in Daily Practice in a Canadian Breast Cancer Screening Program.
    Guertin MH; Théberge I; Zomahoun HT; Dufresne MP; Pelletier É; Brisson J
    Acad Radiol; 2016 Nov; 23(11):1359-1366. PubMed ID: 27567127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: sensitivity and reproducibility in serial examinations.
    Kim SJ; Moon WK; Cho N; Cha JH; Kim SM; Im JG
    Radiology; 2008 Jan; 246(1):71-80. PubMed ID: 18096530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. 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]  

  • 59. Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists.
    Barlow WE; Chi C; Carney PA; Taplin SH; D'Orsi C; Cutter G; Hendrick RE; Elmore JG
    J Natl Cancer Inst; 2004 Dec; 96(24):1840-50. PubMed ID: 15601640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Computer-aided mass detection based on ipsilateral multiview mammograms.
    Qian W; Song D; Lei M; Sankar R; Eikman E
    Acad Radiol; 2007 May; 14(5):530-8. PubMed ID: 17434066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.