Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 100

1.

Comparison of 3MP medical-grade to 1MP office-grade LCD monitors in mammographic diagnostic and perceptual performance.

Ong AH, Pitman AG, Tan SY, Gledhill S, Hennessy O, Lui B, Lemish W, Tauro P, Styles C, Pun E, Waugh J, Padmanabhan M, Lee A.

J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2011 Apr;55(2):153-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02245.x.

PMID:
21501404
2.

Comparison of readers' detection of right-sided and left-sided breast cancers and microcalcifications.

Tan SY, Pitman A, Ong AH, Gledhill S, Pun E, Styles C, Padmanabhan M, Tauro P, Waugh J, Lemish W, Hennessy O, Lui B.

J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2011 Aug;55(4):353-61. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02291.x.

PMID:
21843169
4.

Detection of masses and microcalcifications of breast cancer on digital mammograms: comparison among hard-copy film, 3-megapixel liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors and 5-megapixel LCD monitors: an observer performance study.

Kamitani T, Yabuuchi H, Soeda H, Matsuo Y, Okafuji T, Sakai S, Furuya A, Hatakenaka M, Ishii N, Honda H.

Eur Radiol. 2007 May;17(5):1365-71. Epub 2006 Nov 9.

PMID:
17093968
5.

Intrareader variability in mammographic diagnostic and perceptual performance amongst experienced radiologists in Australia.

Pitman AG, Tan SY, Ong AH, Gledhill S, Tauro P, Lemish W, Waugh J, Padmanabhan M, Lui B, Hennessy O, Styles C, Pun E.

J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2011 Jun;55(3):245-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02260.x.

PMID:
21696556
6.

LCD versus CRT monitors for digital mammography: a comparison of observer performance for the detection of clustered microcalcifications and masses.

Cha JH, Moon WK, Cho N, Lee EH, Park JS, Jang MJ.

Acta Radiol. 2009 Dec;50(10):1104-8. doi: 10.3109/02841850903246608.

PMID:
19922305
7.

Comparison of LCD and CRT displays based on efficacy for digital mammography.

Saunders RS, Samei E, Baker J, Delong D, Soo MS, Walsh R, Pisano E, Kuzmiak CM, Pavic D.

Acad Radiol. 2006 Nov;13(11):1317-26.

PMID:
17070449
8.

Diagnostic performance in differentiation of breast lesion on digital mammograms: comparison among hard-copy film, 3-megapixel LCD monitor, and 5-megapixel LCD monitor.

Kamitani T, Yabuuchi H, Matsuo Y, Setoguchi T, Sakai S, Okafuji T, Sunami S, Hatakenaka M, Ishii N, Kubo M, Tokunaga E, Yamamoto H, Honda H.

Clin Imaging. 2011 Sep-Oct;35(5):341-5. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2010.08.015.

PMID:
21872122
9.

Digital mammography: comparative performance of color LCD and monochrome CRT displays.

Samei E, Poolla A, Ulissey MJ, Lewin JM.

Acad Radiol. 2007 May;14(5):539-46.

PMID:
17434067
10.

Comparison of full-field digital mammography workstation and conventional picture archiving and communication system in image quality and diagnostic performance.

Kang BJ, Kim SH, Choi BG.

Clin Imaging. 2011 Sep-Oct;35(5):336-40. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2010.10.005.

PMID:
21872121
11.

Diagnostic performance of detecting breast cancer on computed radiographic (CR) mammograms: comparison of hard copy film, 3-megapixel liquid-crystal-display (LCD) monitor and 5-megapixel LCD monitor.

Yamada T, Suzuki A, Uchiyama N, Ohuchi N, Takahashi S.

Eur Radiol. 2008 Nov;18(11):2363-9. doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-1016-8. Epub 2008 May 20.

PMID:
18491108
12.

Comparison of soft-copy and hard-copy reading for full-field digital mammography.

Nishikawa RM, Acharyya S, Gatsonis C, Pisano ED, Cole EB, Marques HS, D'Orsi CJ, Farria DM, Kanal KM, Mahoney MC, Rebner M, Staiger MJ; Digital Mammography Image Screening Trial investigator group.

Radiology. 2009 Apr;251(1):41-9. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2511071462.

13.

The use of lower resolution viewing devices for mammographic interpretation: implications for education and training.

Chen Y, James JJ, Turnbull AE, Gale AG.

Eur Radiol. 2015 Oct;25(10):3003-8. doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3718-z. Epub 2015 Jun 3.

PMID:
26037712
15.

Comparison of 5-megapixel cathode ray tube monitors and 5-megapixel liquid crystal monitors for soft-copy reading in full-field digital mammography.

Schueller G, Schueller-Weidekamm C, Pinker K, Memarsadeghi M, Weber M, Helbich TH.

Eur J Radiol. 2010 Oct;76(1):68-72. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.04.070. Epub 2009 May 29.

PMID:
19481396
16.

Detection of interstitial lung abnormalities on picture archive and communication system video monitors.

Washowich TL, Williams SC, Richardson LA, Simmons GE, Dao NV, Allen TW, Hammet GC, Morris MJ.

J Digit Imaging. 1997 Feb;10(1):34-9.

18.

Influence of display quality on radiologists' performance in the detection of lung nodules on radiographs.

Buls N, Shabana W, Verbeek P, Pevenage P, De Mey J.

Br J Radiol. 2007 Sep;80(957):738-43. Epub 2007 Aug 20.

PMID:
17709363
19.

Comparison of viewing angle and observer performances in different types of liquid-crystal display monitors.

Hatanaka S, Morishita J, Hiwasa T, Dogomori K, Toyofuku F, Ohki M, Higashida Y.

Radiol Phys Technol. 2009 Jul;2(2):166-74. doi: 10.1007/s12194-009-0061-6. Epub 2009 May 14.

PMID:
20821116
20.

[Comparison of LCD and CRT monitors for detection of pulmonary nodules and interstitial lung diseases on digital chest radiographs by using receiver operating characteristic analysis].

Ikeda R, Katsuragawa S, Shimonobou T, Hiai Y, Hashida M, Awai K, Yamashita Y, Doi K.

Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2006 May 20;62(5):734-41. Japanese.

PMID:
16733502

Supplemental Content

Support Center