The University of Chicago Header Logo

Connection

Robert Nishikawa to Reproducibility of Results

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Robert Nishikawa has written about Reproducibility of Results.
Connection Strength

1.055
  1. CADe for early detection of breast cancer-current status and why we need to continue to explore new approaches. Acad Radiol. 2014 Oct; 21(10):1320-1.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.075
  2. Estimating sensitivity and specificity for technology assessment based on observer studies. Acad Radiol. 2013 Jul; 20(7):825-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.069
  3. A comparison study of image features between FFDM and film mammogram images. Med Phys. 2012 Jul; 39(7):4386-94.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.065
  4. Retrieval boosted computer-aided diagnosis of clustered microcalcifications for breast cancer. Med Phys. 2012 Feb; 39(2):676-85.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.063
  5. On the orientation of mammographic structure. Med Phys. 2011 Oct; 38(10):5303-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.062
  6. Detection of clustered microcalcifications using spatial point process modeling. Phys Med Biol. 2011 Jan 07; 56(1):1-17.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.058
  7. Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise. Med Phys. 2010 Apr; 37(4):1591-600.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.056
  8. Comparison of power spectra for tomosynthesis projections and reconstructed images. Med Phys. 2009 May; 36(5):1753-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.052
  9. Comparison of soft-copy and hard-copy reading for full-field digital mammography. Radiology. 2009 Apr; 251(1):41-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.052
  10. Identification of simulated microcalcifications in white noise and mammographic backgrounds. Med Phys. 2006 Aug; 33(8):2905-11.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.043
  11. Computer-aided detection, in its present form, is not an effective aid for screening mammography. For the proposition. Med Phys. 2006 Apr; 33(4):811-2.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.042
  12. The hypervolume under the ROC hypersurface of "near-guessing" and "near-perfect" observers in N-class classification tasks. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2005 Mar; 24(3):293-9.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.039
  13. Radial gradient-based segmentation of mammographic microcalcifications: observer evaluation and effect on CAD performance. Med Phys. 2004 Sep; 31(9):2648-57.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  14. Estimating three-class ideal observer decision variables for computerized detection and classification of mammographic mass lesions. Med Phys. 2004 Jan; 31(1):81-90.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.036
  15. The use of a priori information in the detection of mammographic microcalcifications to improve their classification. Med Phys. 2003 May; 30(5):823-31.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.035
  16. A support vector machine approach for detection of microcalcifications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2002 Dec; 21(12):1552-63.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.034
  17. Computer-aided diagnosis complements full-field digital mammography. Diagn Imaging (San Franc). 1999 Sep; 21(9):47-51, 75.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  18. Estimating the Accuracy Level Among Individual Detections in Clustered Microcalcifications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2017 05; 36(5):1162-1171.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  19. Comparison of eye position versus computer identified microcalcification clusters on mammograms. Med Phys. 1997 Jan; 24(1):17-23.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  20. Breast MRI contrast enhancement kinetics of normal parenchyma correlate with presence of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2016 07 22; 18(1):76.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.022
  21. Using breast radiographers' reports as a second opinion for radiologists' readings of microcalcifications in digital mammography. Br J Radiol. 2015 Mar; 88(1047):20140565.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  22. Analysis of perceived similarity between pairs of microcalcification clusters in mammograms. Med Phys. 2014 May; 41(5):051904.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.019
  23. Stereoscopic digital mammography: improved specificity and reduced rate of recall in a prospective clinical trial. Radiology. 2013 Jan; 266(1):81-8.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.017
  24. Automated detection of mass lesions in dedicated breast CT: a preliminary study. Med Phys. 2012 Feb; 39(2):866-73.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
  25. Contrast enhancement of hepatic hemangiomas on multiphase MDCT: Can we diagnose hepatic hemangiomas by comparing enhancement with blood pool? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Aug; 195(2):381-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.014
  26. Automated detection of microcalcification clusters for digital breast tomosynthesis using projection data only: a preliminary study. Med Phys. 2008 Apr; 35(4):1486-93.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.012
  27. Relevance vector machine for automatic detection of clustered microcalcifications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2005 Oct; 24(10):1278-85.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  28. A study on several machine-learning methods for classification of malignant and benign clustered microcalcifications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2005 Mar; 24(3):371-80.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  29. A similarity learning approach to content-based image retrieval: application to digital mammography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2004 Oct; 23(10):1233-44.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  30. Investigation of physical image quality indices of a bone densitometry system. Med Phys. 2004 Apr; 31(4):873-81.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  31. Analysis of methods for reducing false positives in the automated detection of clustered microcalcifications in mammograms. Med Phys. 1998 Aug; 25(8):1502-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.