These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

47 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10624347)

  • 1. Improving the visibility of radio-opaque markers in mammography.
    Kotre CJ; Robson KJ; Simpson W
    Br J Radiol; 1999 Aug; 72(860):799-801. PubMed ID: 10624347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Mammographic equipment, technique, and quality control.
    Friedrich MA
    Curr Opin Radiol; 1991 Aug; 3(4):571-8. PubMed ID: 1888654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Increased radiation dose at mammography due to prolonged exposure, delayed processing, and increased film darkening.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett LW; Gold RH; Chow S
    Radiology; 1991 Feb; 178(2):387-91. PubMed ID: 1987598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Consistency of film optical density in mammographic screening programmes.
    Law J
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Apr; 69(820):306-10. PubMed ID: 8665129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [The technical support of mammography].
    Rozhkova NI; Chikirdin EG; Riudiger IuG; Kochetova GP; Lisachenko IV; Iakobs OE
    Med Tekh; 2000; (5):45-7. PubMed ID: 11076366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Clinical trials in mammography using film-foil combinations. 2. Results of a comparative study series].
    Paterok EM; Säbel M; Weishaar J
    Rontgenpraxis; 1982 Jan; 35(1):20-6. PubMed ID: 7089712
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Implementation of the European protocol for quality control of the technical aspects of mammography screening in Bulgaria.
    Vassileva J; Avramova-Cholakova S; Dimov A; Lichev A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):403-5. PubMed ID: 15933146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Modification of an automatic exposure control system for mammography to accommodate multiple-speed, screen-film systems.
    Rossi RP; Williams C; Gill D
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1988 Oct; 151(4):685-6. PubMed ID: 3262269
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. An experimental investigation of the effect of light-box luminance on the detection of low contrast objects in mammography.
    Robson KJ; Kotre CJ; Faulkner K
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Feb; 69(818):153-9. PubMed ID: 8785644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Optimizing optical density of a Kodak mammography film-screen combination with standard-cycle processing.
    McParland BJ; Boyd MM; al Yousef K
    Br J Radiol; 1998 Sep; 71(849):950-3. PubMed ID: 10195010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Optimum processing of mammographic film.
    Sprawls P; Kitts EL
    Radiographics; 1996 Mar; 16(2):349-54. PubMed ID: 8966292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Complex evaluation of film mammographic imaging systems. 2. Comparison of 18 systems using a signal-noise matrix].
    Friedrich M; Weskamp P
    Rofo; 1984 Jun; 140(6):707-16. PubMed ID: 6429790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Variation of the sensitometric characteristics of seven mammographic films with processing conditions.
    Tsalafoutas IA; Dimakopoulou AD; Koulentianos ED; Serefoglou AN; Yakoumakis EN
    Br J Radiol; 2004 Aug; 77(920):666-71. PubMed ID: 15326045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of radiation dose, focal spot, and automatic exposure of newer film-screen mammography units.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett LW; Gold RH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1987 Nov; 149(5):913-7. PubMed ID: 3499794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of the performance of modern screen-film and digital mammography systems.
    Monnin P; Gutierrez D; Bulling S; Lepori D; Valley JF; Verdun FR
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Jun; 50(11):2617-31. PubMed ID: 15901958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [From a mammographic station to the organization of the Federal Mammologic Center].
    Rozhkova NI; Kharchenko VP
    Vopr Onkol; 2000; 46(6):728-31. PubMed ID: 11219948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Detection of small low-contrast objects in mammography: effect of viewbox masking and luminance.
    Wang J; Gray JE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Jan; 170(1):105-8. PubMed ID: 9423609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Optimisation of X-ray examinations in Lithuania: start of implementation in mammography.
    Adliene D; Adlys G; Cerapaite R; Jonaitiene E; Cibulskaite I
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):399-402. PubMed ID: 15933145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Film viewing conditions in mammography.
    Giesberg DJ
    Radiol Technol; 1997; 68(5):429-31. PubMed ID: 9170188
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Latent image fading in mobile mammographic screening.
    Law J
    Br J Radiol; 1993 Dec; 66(792):1204-5. PubMed ID: 8293271
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.