1Baines C J, Miller AB, Wall C, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of first screen manmmography in the Canadian national breast screening study: a preliminary report from five centres. Radiology, 1986,160: 295-298.
3Kruger DG, Abreu CC, Hendee EG, et al. Iaming characteristics of X - ray capillary optics in digital mammography [J]. Med Phys, 1996,23 (32): 187-196.
4Lewin JM, Hendrick RE, D' orsi C J, et al. Comparison of full - field digital mammography with screen - film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4, 945 paired examinations. Radiology, 2001,218: 873- 880.
5Obenauer S, Luftne- Nagel S, von Heyden D, et al. Screen film vs full - field digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions. Eur Radiol, 2002; 12(7) : 1697 - 1702.
6Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, et al. Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full - field digital mammography vs screen - film mammography: Eur Radiol, 2002 ,12 ( 11 ) :2679 - 2683.
7Oestmann JW, Kopans D, Hall DA, et al. A comparison of digitized storage phosphors and conventional mammography in the detection of malignant microcalcifications. Invest Radiol, 1998,23(10): 725-728.
8Nawano S, Murakami K, Moriyama N, 3et al. Computer - aided diagnosis in full digital mammography [J]. Invest Radiol, 1999;34 (4): 310-316
9Freer TW, Ulissey MJ. Screening Mammography with computer- aided detection: prospective study of 12, 860 patients in a community breast cancer. Radiology, 2001,220: 781-786.
10Michell MJ. Breast cancer screening [ J]. Int J Clin Pract,2001, 55 (8): 531-535.
