Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization image processing to improve the detection of simulated spiculations in dense mammograms

Homer MJ: Mammographic Interpretation: A practical approach. New York, NY, McGraw Hill, 1991, pp 4–5

Rosenman J, Roe CA, Cromartie R, et al: Portal Film enhancement: Technique and clinical utility. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Physics 25:333–338, 1993

Schmidt RA, Nishikawa RM: Clinical Use of Digital Mammography: The Present and the Prospects. J Digit Imaging 8:74–79, 1995 (suppl 1)

Shtern F: Digital mammography and related technologies: A perspective from the National Cancer Institute. Radiology 183:629–30, 1992

Feig SA, Yaffe MJ: Current status of digital mammography. Sem Ultrasound, CT and MR 17:424–443, 1997

Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al: Does intensity windowing improve the detection of simulated calcifications in dense mammograms? J Digit Imaging 10:79–84, 1997

Pisano ED, Chandramouli J, Hemminger BM, et al: The effect of intensity windowing as an image processing tool in the detection of simulated masses embedded in digitized mammograms. J Digit Imaging 10:174–182, 1997

Puff DT, Pisano ED, Muller KE, et al: A method for determination of optimal image enhancement for the detection of mammographic abnormalities. J Digit Imaging 7:161–171, 1994

McSweeney MB, Sprawls P, Egan RL: Enhanced image mammography. AJR Am J Roentgerol 140:9–14, 1983

Smathers RL, Bush E, Drace J, et al: Mammographic microcalcifications: Detection with xerography, screen film, and digitized film display. Radiology 159:673–677, 1986

Chan HP, Doi K, Galhorta S, et al: Image feature analysis and computer-aided diagnosis in digital radiography: I. Automated detection of microcalcifications in mammography. Med Phys 14:538–547, 1987

Chan HP, Vyborny CJ, MacMahon H, et al: Digital mammography ROC studies of the effects of pixel size and unsharp-mask filtering on the detection of subtle microcalcifications. Invest Radiol 22:581–589, 1987

Hale DA, Cook JF, Baniqued Z, et al: Selective digital enhancement of conventional film mammography. J Surg Onc 55:42–46, 1994

Yin F, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, et al: Comparison of bilateral-subtraction and single-image processing techniques in the computerized detection of mammographic masses. Invest Radiol 28:473–781, 1993

Yin F, Giger M, Doi K, et al: Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: Analysis of bilateral subtraction images. Med Phys 18:955–963, 1991

Kallergi M, Clarke LP, Qian W, et al: Interpretation of calcifications in screen/film, digitized and wavelet-enhanced monitor-displayed mammograms: A receiver-operating characteristic study. Acad Radiol 3:285–293, 1996

Pizer S, Zimmerman JB, Staab EV: Adaptive grey level assignment in CT scan display. J Comput Assist Tomogr 8:300–305, 1984

Pizer SM: Psychovisual issues in the display of medical images, in Hoehne KH (ed): Pictoral Information Systems in Medicine. Berlin, Germany, Springer-Verlag, 1985, pp 211–234

Revesz G, Kundel HL, Graber MD: The influence of structured noise on the detection of radiologic abnormalities. Invest Radiol 9:479–486, 1974

Kundel HL, Revesz G: Lesion conspicuity, structured noise and film reader error. AJR Am J Roentgenol 126:1233–1238, 1976

Revesz G, Kundel HL: Psychophysical studies of detection errors in chest radiology. Radiology 128:559–562, 1977

MacMillan NA, Creelman CD: Detection theory: A user guide. Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press, 1991, pp 135–136