Literature DB >> 19789251

Can computer-aided detection be detrimental to mammographic interpretation?

Liane E Philpotts1.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Year:  2009        PMID： 19789251     DOI： 10.1148/radiol.2531090689

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN： 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


× No keyword cloud information.
  22 in total

1.  Exploring the potential of context-sensitive CADe in screening mammography.

Authors:  Georgia D Tourassi; Maciej A Mazurowski; Brian P Harrawood; Elizabeth A Krupinski
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Image toggling saves time in mammography.

Authors:  Trafton Drew; Avi M Aizenman; Matthew B Thompson; Mark D Kovacs; Michael Trambert; Murray A Reicher; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2015-10-12

3.  False positive marks on unsuspicious screening mammography with computer-aided detection.

Authors:  Mary C Mahoney; Karthikeyan Meganathan
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.056

Review 4.  Deep learning in breast radiology: current progress and future directions.

Authors:  William C Ou; Dogan Polat; Basak E Dogan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2021-01-15       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Computer-aided diagnosis for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Yuichi Mori; Shin-Ei Kudo; Tyler M Berzin; Masashi Misawa; Kenichi Takeda
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 10.093

6.  Analog Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) information can be more effective than binary marks.

Authors:  Corbin A Cunningham; Trafton Drew; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  The Rebirth of CAD: How Is Modern AI Different from the CAD We Know?

Authors:  Luke Oakden-Rayner
Journal:  Radiol Artif Intell       Date:  2019-05-29

8.  Ovarian tumor characterization and classification using ultrasound-a new online paradigm.

Authors:  U Rajendra Acharya; S Vinitha Sree; Luca Saba; Filippo Molinari; Stefano Guerriero; Jasjit S Suri
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 4.056

9.  Effectiveness of computer-aided detection in community mammography practice.

Authors:  Joshua J Fenton; Linn Abraham; Stephen H Taplin; Berta M Geller; Patricia A Carney; Carl D'Orsi; Joann G Elmore; William E Barlow
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 10.  Is the false-positive rate in mammography in North America too high?

Authors:  Michelle T Le; Carmel E Mothersill; Colin B Seymour; Fiona E McNeill
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 3.039
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.