How do lesion size and random noise affect detection performance in digital mammography?
暂无分享,去创建一个
Walter Huda | David R Dance | W. Huda | E. Scalzetti | K. Ogden | D. Dance | Ernest M Scalzetti | Kent M Ogden | Elizabeth A Bertrand | E. A. Bertrand
[1] Gary R Cutter,et al. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose. , 2003, Medical physics.
[2] Andrzej Krol,et al. Signal-to-noise ratio and radiation dose as a function of photon energy in mammography , 1998, Medical Imaging.
[3] D. C. Barber,et al. Medical Imaging-The Assessment of Image Quality , 1996 .
[4] P F Judy,et al. The Medical Image Perception Society. Key issues for image perception research. , 1998, Radiology.
[5] L. Wagner,et al. Analysis of variations in contrast-detail experiments. , 1984, Medical physics.
[6] Sankararaman Suryanarayanan,et al. A Perceptual Evaluation of JPEG 2000 Image Compression for Digital Mammography: Contrast-Detail Characteristics , 2004, Journal of Digital Imaging.
[7] L L Fajardo,et al. Contrast-detail detectability analysis: comparison of a digital spot mammography system and an analog screen-film mammography system. , 1997, Academic radiology.
[8] A. Burgess. Comparison of receiver operating characteristic and forced choice observer performance measurement methods. , 1995, Medical physics.
[9] C. J. Kotre,et al. The effect of background structure on the detection of low contrast objects in mammography. , 1998, The British journal of radiology.
[10] David R. Dance,et al. How do radiographic techniques affect mass lesion detection performance in digital mammography? , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.
[11] F. Mettler,et al. ROC and contrast detail image evaluation tests compared. , 1985, Radiology.
[12] Walter Huda,et al. Experimental investigation of the dose and image quality characteristics of a digital mammography imaging system. , 2003, Medical physics.
[13] A. Rose,et al. Vision: human and electronic , 1973 .
[14] F. Thibault,et al. Digital detectors for mammography: the technical challenges , 2004, European Radiology.
[15] H. Kundel,et al. Lesion conspicuity, structured noise, and film reader error. , 1976, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.
[16] F R Verdun,et al. Estimation of the noisy component of anatomical backgrounds. , 1999, Medical physics.
[17] H L Kundel,et al. Nodule detection with and without a chest image. , 1985, Investigative radiology.
[18] R. Rangayyan. Biomedical Image Analysis , 2004 .
[19] Kerry T. Krugh,et al. Microcalcification detectability for four mammographic detectors: flat-panel, CCD, CR, and screen/film). , 2002, Medical physics.
[20] C. J. Kotre,et al. The use of a contrast-detail test object in the optimization of optical density in mammography. , 1995, The British journal of radiology.
[21] J H Siewerdsen,et al. Generalized DQE analysis of radiographic and dual-energy imaging using flat-panel detectors. , 2005, Medical physics.
[22] R. Aufrichtig,et al. Comparison of low contrast detectability between a digital amorphous silicon and a screen-film based imaging system for thoracic radiography. , 1999, Medical physics.
[23] A. Burgess,et al. Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise. , 2001, Medical physics.
[24] David R. Dance,et al. Comparison of Objective and Subjective Methods to Assess Imaging Performance in Digital Mammography , 2003 .
[25] K Faulkner,et al. The contrast-detail behaviour of a photostimulable phosphor based computed radiography system. , 1994, Physics in medicine and biology.
[26] E Samei,et al. Detection of subtle lung nodules: relative influence of quantum and anatomic noise on chest radiographs. , 1999, Radiology.
[27] Ehsan Samei,et al. Subtle lung nodules: influence of local anatomic variations on detection. , 2003, Radiology.
[28] E. Krupinski,et al. The importance of perception research in medical imaging. , 2000, Radiation medicine.
[29] E. Grabbe,et al. Magnification mammography: a comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for the detection of simulated small masses and microcalcifications , 2002, European Radiology.
[30] R. Edward Hendrick,et al. Mammography quality control manual , 1999 .
[31] John M. Boone,et al. Optimizing the x-ray photon energy for digital radiographic imaging systems , 2002, SPIE Medical Imaging.
[32] R. Hendrick,et al. Performance comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography in clinical practice. , 2002, Medical physics.
[33] Srinivasan Vedantham,et al. Flat-panel digital mammography system: contrast-detail comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images. , 2002, Radiology.
[34] J. James,et al. The current status of digital mammography. , 2004, Clinical radiology.