Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST.
about
Consequences of false-positive screening mammogramsComparative evaluation of digital mammography and film mammography: systematic review and meta-analysisMeasurement of breast density with digital breast tomosynthesis--a systematic reviewBreast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society.Vision 20/20: Mammographic breast density and its clinical applicationsA Review on Automatic Mammographic Density and Parenchymal SegmentationNuclear imaging of the breast: translating achievements in instrumentation into clinical useGeneration of a suite of 3D computer-generated breast phantoms from a limited set of human subject data.Full-field digital mammography image data storage reduction using a crop tool.How does age affect baseline screening mammography performance measures? A decision model.Compositional breast imaging using a dual-energy mammography protocol.Mammographic compression in Asian women.A new full-field digital mammography system with and without the use of an advanced post-processing algorithm: comparison of image quality and diagnostic performance.European radiographers' challenges from mammography education and clinical practice - an integrative review.Digital breast tomosynthesis changes management in patients seen at a tertiary care breast center.Clinician's guide to imaging and pathologic findings in benign breast disease.Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial.Costs, evidence, and value in the Medicare program: the challenges of technology innovation in breast cancer prevention and control.Qualitative Versus Quantitative Mammographic Breast Density Assessment: Applications for the US and AbroadTimed efficiency of interpretation of digital and film-screen screening mammogramsDiagnostic performance of a Near-Infrared Breast Imaging system as adjunct to mammography versus X-ray mammography alone.A framework for evaluating diagnostic discordance in pathology discovered during research studies.Evolution of breast cancer screening in the Medicare population: clinical and economic implications.Computerized breast mass detection using multi-scale Hessian-based analysis for dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI.Dedicated breast computed tomography: the optimal cross-sectional imaging solution?Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography: comparison with conventional mammography and histopathology in 152 womenWhy does it take longer to read digital than film-screen screening mammograms? A partial explanation.Use of BI-RADS 3-probably benign category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial.Criteria for identifying radiologists with acceptable screening mammography interpretive performance on basis of multiple performance measures.Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort studySimulated lesion, human observer performance comparison between thin-section dedicated breast CT images versus computed thick-section simulated projection images of the breast.Development of an online, publicly accessible naive Bayesian decision support tool for mammographic mass lesions based on the American College of Radiology (ACR) BI-RADS lexicon.Annual screening strategies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers: a comparative effectiveness analysisDisparities in screening mammography services by race/ethnicity and health insuranceEffect of protocol-related variables and women's characteristics on the cumulative false-positive risk in breast cancer screening.Density is in the eye of the beholder: visual versus semi-automated assessment of breast density on standard mammograms.Mammographic artifact leading to false-positive resultClinical application of low-dose phase contrast breast CT: methods for the optimization of the reconstruction workflow.Proof of concept for low-dose molecular breast imaging with a dual-head CZT gamma camera. Part I. Evaluation in phantoms.Proof of concept for low-dose molecular breast imaging with a dual-head CZT gamma camera. Part II. Evaluation in patients.
P2860
Q24563753-C928B8B1-71EC-44A4-ABA4-CBB0DC78DFF5Q26851245-3D689469-8248-40D0-8324-4C3C5A17FEDFQ27008091-2E37AC2D-7456-4669-BDD5-CFAFB36BC62AQ27347760-0CFB4921-B40C-4F11-8A64-B56702E350F3Q28081408-E1190974-C856-4A5A-BA8C-205535EB0156Q28081790-1A5B9721-625B-424C-86C9-BAC4A7753107Q30419180-99ED76FB-DF64-459E-B98E-4B5CA20173E9Q30440915-36CAF361-9ABB-49F2-B838-F3205F4ADEE5Q30830053-6F2920E4-C5D3-450E-B181-46C01D8CFCBDQ33370698-DF0441B9-6602-4FC9-A65E-5BC3BB7B2C18Q33571727-3DC699CC-4A87-4DE0-98A0-80CDE09FD1F5Q33574476-2879A934-C509-4444-B851-ED096312EADEQ33620172-8E452C6E-052A-4253-9099-C208F87F7D68Q33708326-993887FC-35A6-4CF0-8460-15EC9971ADDDQ33711000-B9D58726-0F07-4F68-A6EE-F742D0151D8CQ33744173-13207B60-40DA-477D-91D0-323C2233D0DBQ33788616-876D4E09-8F26-431B-8781-2B0440C55F1EQ33809046-FF3140F8-57BA-4EAB-AEAE-F97A9430D15AQ33850485-C455F412-F14D-4D97-94C5-2DB7BA3B44F6Q34013527-1D2AB598-C9A0-42C6-9646-DF9ADB62DD6DQ34030538-24390EDC-A1DE-45EF-8FC1-596594C52DBAQ34097337-E79856D5-30F3-4E6B-829D-8731A8C5DB0EQ34137696-CDB2240C-7E95-4556-9D91-9494D70B9AD2Q34226479-75364866-7FA6-438B-9D8E-D89FA27BFDABQ34273318-BE8797F3-1D4A-4979-8D20-6932F862DE5DQ34592180-EDD033B9-9F45-488B-B10D-F11C32F068B3Q34598414-516B0B28-5EF9-4485-94EE-03EA5240A53FQ35062110-9E346D35-ADD8-4C0A-8929-9F17AB452C42Q35206455-40C5EC58-20C9-4168-A291-1FB72E55582BQ35532803-CFA7AA78-2D85-41EC-A68E-6DF57F01D9ACQ35552752-624474B3-CE7A-4CE1-A3BD-DF3EC2E25148Q35572206-B74301F3-A34D-4E82-AD1F-C072BB5F6862Q35633057-3D01CBCB-80B6-4A46-86E3-15C4A3FCD688Q35721756-80E661D1-B20C-453E-9A05-C7AF3728F98DQ35747289-71AE6FFB-11B7-4299-BF75-687678731EBCQ35798620-9BFC4773-BDE8-47C9-B7CE-D9E0C7C54781Q35821776-FCED6FDA-17E9-4A90-9AA5-46C789854462Q35970581-50338D98-4F5F-4D90-A076-265B3F5D14DCQ36035225-14BC7085-EE93-4C76-87F4-2CFB030640BFQ36035232-DD62000C-102F-40F8-B64D-C792BFF4AE9A
P2860
Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST.
description
article científic
@ca
article scientifique
@fr
articolo scientifico
@it
artigo científico
@pt
bilimsel makale
@tr
scientific article published on February 2008
@en
vedecký článok
@sk
vetenskaplig artikel
@sv
videnskabelig artikel
@da
vědecký článek
@cs
name
Diagnostic accuracy of digital ...... population subgroups in DMIST.
@en
Diagnostic accuracy of digital ...... population subgroups in DMIST.
@nl
type
label
Diagnostic accuracy of digital ...... population subgroups in DMIST.
@en
Diagnostic accuracy of digital ...... population subgroups in DMIST.
@nl
prefLabel
Diagnostic accuracy of digital ...... population subgroups in DMIST.
@en
Diagnostic accuracy of digital ...... population subgroups in DMIST.
@nl
P2093
P2860
P1433
P1476
Diagnostic accuracy of digital ...... population subgroups in DMIST.
@en
P2093
Anna N A Tosteson
Carl J D'Orsi
Constantine A Gatsonis
DMIST Investigators Group
Emily F Conant
Etta D Pisano
Janet K Baum
Jean B Cormack
Laurie L Fajardo
Lawrence W Bassett
P2860
P304
P356
10.1148/RADIOL.2461070200
P407
P577
2008-02-01T00:00:00Z