English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

The purpose of the present study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dual-view digital mammography (DM), single-view breast tomosynthesis (BT) and BT combined with the opposite DM view. Patients with subtle lesions were selected to undergo BT examinations. Two radiologists who are non-participants in the study and have experience in using DM and BT determined the locations and extents of lesions in the images. Five expert mammographers interpreted the cases using the free-response paradigm. The task was to mark and rate clinically reportable findings suspicious for malignancy and clinically relevant benign findings. The marks were scored with reference to the outlined regions into lesion localization or non-lesion localization, and analysed by the jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic method. The analysis yielded statistically significant differences between the combined modality and dual-view DM ( p  &lt; 0.05). No differences were found between single-view BT and dual-view DM or between single-view BT and the combined modality.

radiation protection dosimetry

The diagnostic accuracy of dual-view digital mammography, single-view breast tomosynthesis and a dual-view combination of breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography in a free-response observer performance study