Abraham H. Dachman to Sensitivity and Specificity
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Abraham H. Dachman has written about Sensitivity and Specificity.
Connection Strength
1.355
-
Pearls and Pitfalls of Interpretation in CT Colonography. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2020 May; 71(2):140-148.
Score: 0.130
-
CT colonography with computer-aided detection: recognizing the causes of false-positive reader results. Radiographics. 2014 Nov-Dec; 34(7):1885-905.
Score: 0.090
-
Effect of computer-aided detection for CT colonography in a multireader, multicase trial. Radiology. 2010 Sep; 256(3):827-35.
Score: 0.067
-
CT colonography: advanced computer-aided detection scheme utilizing MTANNs for detection of "missed" polyps in a multicenter clinical trial. Med Phys. 2010 Jan; 37(1):12-21.
Score: 0.065
-
Bias, underestimation of risk, and loss of statistical power in patient-level analyses of lesion detection. Eur Radiol. 2010 Mar; 20(3):584-94.
Score: 0.063
-
Comparison of 2D and 3D views for evaluation of flat lesions in CT colonography. Acad Radiol. 2010 Jan; 17(1):39-47.
Score: 0.063
-
Formative evaluation of standardized training for CT colonographic image interpretation by novice readers. Radiology. 2008 Oct; 249(1):167-77.
Score: 0.059
-
Quality of CT colonography-related web sites for consumers. J Am Coll Radiol. 2008 Apr; 5(4):593-7.
Score: 0.057
-
CT colonography: false-negative interpretations. Radiology. 2007 Jul; 244(1):165-73.
Score: 0.054
-
Multidetector row CT of small bowel obstruction. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007 May; 45(3):499-512, viii.
Score: 0.054
-
CT colonography: visualization methods, interpretation, and pitfalls. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007 Mar; 45(2):347-59.
Score: 0.053
-
CAD techniques, challenges, and controversies in computed tomographic colonography. Abdom Imaging. 2005 Jan-Feb; 30(1):26-41.
Score: 0.046
-
Computer-aided diagnosis for CT colonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2004 Oct; 25(5):419-31.
Score: 0.045
-
Quality and consistency in CT colonography and research reporting. Radiology. 2004 Feb; 230(2):319-23.
Score: 0.043
-
Virtual colonoscopy: past, present, and future. Radiol Clin North Am. 2003 Mar; 41(2):377-93.
Score: 0.040
-
Virtual colonoscopy. Potential clinical applications of a new technique. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2002 Sep; 31(3):747-57.
Score: 0.039
-
Virtual colonoscopy: a novel imaging modality for colorectal cancer. Curr Oncol Rep. 2001 Mar; 3(2):88-93.
Score: 0.035
-
Comparative viewing modalities for CT cystography. Abdom Imaging. 2001 Jan-Feb; 26(1):92-7.
Score: 0.035
-
CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998 Oct; 171(4):989-95.
Score: 0.030
-
Small simulated polyps in pig colon: sensitivity of CT virtual colography. Radiology. 1997 May; 203(2):427-30.
Score: 0.027
-
The Added Value of the CT Colonography Reporting and Data System. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016 Aug; 13(8):931-5.
Score: 0.025
-
CT colonography for the detection of nonpolypoid adenomas: sensitivity assessed with restricted national CT colonography trial criteria. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Dec; 203(6):W614-22.
Score: 0.023
-
How effective is enteroclysis in detecting the source of occult bleeding when an upper and lower endoscopy are negative? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994 Nov; 163(5):1261-2.
Score: 0.023
-
The National CT Colonography Trial: assessment of accuracy in participants 65 years of age and older. Radiology. 2012 May; 263(2):401-8.
Score: 0.019
-
ACRIN CT colonography trial: does reader's preference for primary two-dimensional versus primary three-dimensional interpretation affect performance? Radiology. 2011 May; 259(2):435-41.
Score: 0.018
-
Can radiologist training and testing ensure high performance in CT colonography? Lessons From the National CT Colonography Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Jul; 195(1):117-25.
Score: 0.017
-
What's the control in studies measuring the effect of computer-aided detection (CAD) on observer performance? Acad Radiol. 2010 Jun; 17(6):761-7.
Score: 0.017
-
CT colonography polyp matching: differences between experienced readers. Eur Radiol. 2009 Jul; 19(7):1723-30.
Score: 0.015
-
Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med. 2008 Sep 18; 359(12):1207-17.
Score: 0.015
-
Mixture of expert 3D massive-training ANNs for reduction of multiple types of false positives in CAD for detection of polyps in CT colonography. Med Phys. 2008 Feb; 35(2):694-703.
Score: 0.014
-
Region-based supine-prone correspondence for the reduction of false-positive CAD polyp candidates in CT colonography. Acad Radiol. 2005 Jun; 12(6):695-707.
Score: 0.012
-
Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet. 2005 Jan 22-28; 365(9456):305-11.
Score: 0.011
-
Computerized detection of colorectal masses in CT colonography based on fuzzy merging and wall-thickening analysis. Med Phys. 2004 Apr; 31(4):860-72.
Score: 0.011
-
Computerized tomographic colonography: performance evaluation in a retrospective multicenter setting. Gastroenterology. 2003 Sep; 125(3):688-95.
Score: 0.010
-
Computer-aided diagnosis scheme for detection of polyps at CT colonography. Radiographics. 2002 Jul-Aug; 22(4):963-79.
Score: 0.010
-
Efficacy and safety of mangafodipir trisodium (MnDPDP) injection for hepatic MRI in adults: results of the U.S. Multicenter phase III clinical trials. Efficacy of early imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000 Nov; 12(5):689-701.
Score: 0.009
-
Safety and efficacy of mangafodipir trisodium (MnDPDP) injection for hepatic MRI in adults: results of the U.S. multicenter phase III clinical trials (safety). J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000 Jul; 12(1):186-97.
Score: 0.008
-
Prevalence and duration of postoperative pneumoperitoneum: sensitivity of CT vs left lateral decubitus radiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993 Oct; 161(4):781-5.
Score: 0.005