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 *

81 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9268889)

  • 41. Density correction of peripheral breast tissue on digital mammograms.
    Bick U; Giger ML; Schmidt RA; Nishikawa RM; Doi K
    Radiographics; 1996 Nov; 16(6):1403-11. PubMed ID: 8946544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Calculation of the properties of digital mammograms using a computer simulation.
    Hunt RA; Dance DR; Bakic PR; Maidment AD; Sandborg M; Ullman G; Alm Carlsson G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):395-8. PubMed ID: 15933144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Digitization requirements in mammography: effects on computer-aided detection of microcalcifications.
    Chan HP; Niklason LT; Ikeda DM; Lam KL; Adler DD
    Med Phys; 1994 Jul; 21(7):1203-11. PubMed ID: 7968855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Mammography screening using independent double reading with consensus: is there a potential benefit for computer-aided detection?
    Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Hofvind S; Jahr G; Castellino RA
    Acta Radiol; 2012 Apr; 53(3):241-8. PubMed ID: 22287148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Estimation of compressed breast thickness during mammography.
    Highnam RP; Brady JM; Shepstone BJ
    Br J Radiol; 1998 Jun; 71(846):646-53. PubMed ID: 9849389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Content-based retrieval of mammograms using visual features related to breast density patterns.
    Kinoshita SK; de Azevedo-Marques PM; Pereira RR; Rodrigues JA; Rangayyan RM
    J Digit Imaging; 2007 Jun; 20(2):172-90. PubMed ID: 17318705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Computer-aided mass detection in mammography: false positive reduction via gray-scale invariant ranklet texture features.
    Masotti M; Lanconelli N; Campanini R
    Med Phys; 2009 Feb; 36(2):311-6. PubMed ID: 19291970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Location of mammograms ROI's and reduction of false-positive.
    Salazar-Licea LA; Pedraza-Ortega JC; Pastrana-Palma A; Aceves-Fernandez MA
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2017 May; 143():97-111. PubMed ID: 28391823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Detecting clustered microcalcifications in the female breast: secondary digitized images versus mammograms.
    De Maeseneer M; Beeckman P; Osteaux M; Mattheus R; Hoste M; Bastaerts Y; Jong B
    J Belge Radiol; 1992 Jun; 75(3):173-8. PubMed ID: 1400145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. 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]  

  • 51. Multiresolution statistical analysis of high-resolution digital mammograms.
    Heine JJ; Deans SR; Cullers DK; Stauduhar R; Clarke LP
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 1997 Oct; 16(5):503-15. PubMed ID: 9368106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Teleradiology with uncompressed digital mammograms: clinical assessment.
    Fruehwald-Pallamar J; Jantsch M; Pinker K; Hofmeister R; Semturs F; Piegler K; Staribacher D; Weber M; Helbich TH
    Eur J Radiol; 2013 Mar; 82(3):412-6. PubMed ID: 22497772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Combined adaptive enhancement and region-growing segmentation of breast masses on digitized mammograms.
    Petrick N; Chan HP; Sahiner B; Helvie MA
    Med Phys; 1999 Aug; 26(8):1642-54. PubMed ID: 10501064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. ATMTN: a telemammography network architecture.
    Sheybani EO; Sankar R
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2002 Dec; 49(12):1438-43. PubMed ID: 12542239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Anthropomorphic radiological phantoms for mammography.
    Yaffe MJ; Byng JW; Caldwell CB; Bennett NR
    Med Prog Technol; 1993; 19(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 8302211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Novel mammographic image features differentiate between interval and screen-detected breast cancer: a case-case study.
    Strand F; Humphreys K; Cheddad A; Törnberg S; Azavedo E; Shepherd J; Hall P; Czene K
    Breast Cancer Res; 2016 Oct; 18(1):100. PubMed ID: 27716311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. [Improvement of detectability of microcalcifications by magnification digital mammography].
    Higashida Y; Hatemura M; Yoshida A; Takada T; Takahashi M
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1998 Aug; 58(9):473-8. PubMed ID: 9778932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Comparative performance of multiview stereoscopic and mammographic display modalities for breast lesion detection.
    Webb LJ; Samei E; Lo JY; Baker JA; Ghate SV; Kim C; Soo MS; Walsh R
    Med Phys; 2011 Apr; 38(4):1972-80. PubMed ID: 21626930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Computer aided detection of clusters of microcalcifications on full field digital mammograms.
    Ge J; Sahiner B; Hadjiiski LM; Chan HP; Wei J; Helvie MA; Zhou C
    Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2975-88. PubMed ID: 16964876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Evaluation of a novel method of noise reduction using computer-simulated mammograms.
    Tischenko O; Hoeschen C; Dance DR; Hunt RA; Maidment AD; Bakic PR
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):81-4. PubMed ID: 15933085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.