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.
2. [Performance assessment of mammographic diagnostic systems: evolution of methods and their application to a digital image study]. Compagnone G, Ferruzzi K, Pierotti L, Vianello Vos C, Berardi P, Bergamini C. Radiol Med; 1999 Mar; 97(3):179-87. PubMed ID: 10363062 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Microcalcification detectability for four mammographic detectors: flat-panel, CCD, CR, and screen/film). Rong XJ, Shaw CC, Johnston DA, Lemacks MR, Liu X, Whitman GJ, Dryden MJ, Stephens TW, Thompson SK, Krugh KT, Lai CJ. Med Phys; 2002 Sep; 29(9):2052-61. PubMed ID: 12349926 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. 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 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Relationship between image information content and observer performance in digital intraoral radiography. Takarabe S, Okamura K, Kuramoto T, Tokumori K, Kato T, Yoshiura K. Oral Radiol; 2023 Jul; 39(3):491-503. PubMed ID: 36289169 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Is an ROC-type response truly always better than a binary response in observer performance studies? Gur D, Bandos AI, Rockette HE, Zuley ML, Hakim CM, Chough DM, Ganott MA, Sumkin JH. Acad Radiol; 2010 May; 17(5):639-45. PubMed ID: 20236840 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. [Diagnostic detection performance of a simulated nodule in chest computed tomography images and gray and color nuclear medicine images: comparison between a medical liquid crystal display monitor and an ordinary liquid crystal display monitor]. Okumura E, Kamimae R, Miyashita K, Ueda R, Kanmae Y, Kubo M, Shirasaka N, Takeda T, Hashimoto N. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2014 Aug; 70(8):757-67. PubMed ID: 25142386 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Effects of radiographic techniques on the low-contrast detail detectability performance of digital radiography systems. Alsleem H, U P, Mong KS, Davidson R. Radiol Technol; 2014 Aug; 85(6):614-22. PubMed ID: 25002641 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. [Chest radiography: ROC phantom study of four different digital systems and one conventional radiographic system]. Redlich U, Reissberg S, Hoeschen C, Effenberger O, Fessel A, Preuss H, Scherlach C, Döhring W. Rofo; 2003 Jan; 175(1):38-45. PubMed ID: 12525979 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Assessing image quality and dose reduction of a new x-ray computed tomography iterative reconstruction algorithm using model observers. Tseng HW, Fan J, Kupinski MA, Sainath P, Hsieh J. Med Phys; 2014 Jul; 41(7):071910. PubMed ID: 24989388 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. An anthropomorphic phantom for receiver operating characteristic studies in CT imaging of liver lesions. Olerud HM, Olsen JB, Skretting A. Br J Radiol; 1999 Jan; 72(853):35-43. PubMed ID: 10341687 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Improvement of low-contrast detectability in low-dose hepatic multidetector computed tomography using a novel adaptive filter: evaluation with a computer-simulated liver including tumors. Funama Y, Awai K, Miyazaki O, Nakayama Y, Goto T, Omi Y, Shimonobo T, Liu D, Yamashita Y, Hori S. Invest Radiol; 2006 Jan; 41(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 16355033 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]