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 *

476 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10705143)

  • 41. Radiologists' preferences for digital mammographic display. The International Digital Mammography Development Group.
    Pisano ED; Cole EB; Major S; Zong S; Hemminger BM; Muller KE; Johnston RE; Walsh R; Conant E; Fajardo LL; Feig SA; Nishikawa RM; Yaffe MJ; Williams MB; Aylward SR
    Radiology; 2000 Sep; 216(3):820-30. PubMed ID: 10966717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Storage phosphor and film-screen mammography: performance with different mammographic techniques.
    Kheddache S; Thilander-Klang A; Lanhede B; Månsson LG; Bjurstam N; Ackerholm P; Björneld L
    Eur Radiol; 1999; 9(4):591-7. PubMed ID: 10354868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Image quality of digital direct flat-panel mammography versus an analog screen-film technique using a phantom model.
    Krug KB; Stützer H; Girnus R; Zähringer M; Gossmann A; Winnekendonk G; Lackner K
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):399-407. PubMed ID: 17242248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography in Japanese population-based screening.
    Yamada T; Saito M; Ishibashi T; Tsuboi M; Matsuhashi T; Sato A; Saito H; Takahashi S; Onuki K; Ouchi N
    Radiat Med; 2004; 22(6):408-12. PubMed ID: 15648457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Microcalcification detectability for four mammographic detectors: flat-panel, CCD, CR, and screen/film).
    Rong XJ; Shaw CC; Johnston DA; Lemacks MR; Liu X; Whitman GJ; Dryden MJ; Stephens TW; Thompson SK; Krugh KT; Lai CJ
    Med Phys; 2002 Sep; 29(9):2052-61. PubMed ID: 12349926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. The effects of gray scale image processing on digital mammography interpretation performance.
    Cole EB; Pisano ED; Zeng D; Muller K; Aylward SR; Park S; Kuzmiak C; Koomen M; Pavic D; Walsh R; Baker J; Gimenez EI; Freimanis R
    Acad Radiol; 2005 May; 12(5):585-95. PubMed ID: 15866131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Physical and clinical comparison between a screen-film system and a dual-side reading mammography-dedicated computed radiography system.
    Rivetti S; Canossi B; Battista R; Lanconelli N; Vetruccio E; Danielli C; Borasi G; Torricelli P
    Acta Radiol; 2009 Dec; 50(10):1109-18. PubMed ID: 19922306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Evaluation of clinical image processing algorithms used in digital mammography.
    Zanca F; Jacobs J; Van Ongeval C; Claus F; Celis V; Geniets C; Provost V; Pauwels H; Marchal G; Bosmans H
    Med Phys; 2009 Mar; 36(3):765-75. PubMed ID: 19378737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. A comparison of digital and screen-film mammography using quality control phantoms.
    Undrill PE; O'Kane AD; Gilbert FJ
    Clin Radiol; 2000 Oct; 55(10):782-90. PubMed ID: 11052880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Real and simulated clustered microcalcifications in digital mammograms. ROC study of observer performance.
    Lado MJ; Tahoces PG; Souto M; Méndez AJ; Vidal JJ
    Med Phys; 1997 Sep; 24(9):1385-94. PubMed ID: 9304566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A new test phantom with different breast tissue compositions for image quality assessment in conventional and digital mammography.
    Pachoud M; Lepori D; Valley JF; Verdun FR
    Phys Med Biol; 2004 Dec; 49(23):5267-81. PubMed ID: 15656276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with a conventional screen film system (SFS) and a new full-field digital mammography unit (DR) with a-Se-detector.
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E; Schmid A; Imhoff K; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):766-8. PubMed ID: 12811687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. A comparison of digitized storage phosphors and conventional mammography in the detection of malignant microcalcifications.
    Oestmann JW; Kopans D; Hall DA; McCarthy KA; Rubens JR; Greene R
    Invest Radiol; 1988 Oct; 23(10):725-8. PubMed ID: 3192395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Digital versus screen-film mammography: a retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program.
    Heddson B; Rönnow K; Olsson M; Miller D
    Eur J Radiol; 2007 Dec; 64(3):419-25. PubMed ID: 17383841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Detecting clustered microcalcifications in the female breast: secondary digitized images versus mammograms.
    De Maeseneer M; Beeckman P; Osteaux M; Mattheus R; Hoste M; Bastaerts Y; Jong B
    J Belge Radiol; 1992 Jun; 75(3):173-8. PubMed ID: 1400145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Detection of simulated microcalcifications in fixed mammary tissue: An ROC study of the effect of local versus global histogram equalization.
    Sund T; Olsen JB
    Acta Radiol; 2006 Sep; 47(7):650-4. PubMed ID: 16950699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Interpretation of calcifications in screen/film, digitized, and wavelet-enhanced monitor-displayed mammograms: a receiver operating characteristic study.
    Kallergi M; Clarke LP; Qian W; Gavrielides M; Venugopal P; Berman CG; Holman-Ferris SD; Miller MS; Clark RA
    Acad Radiol; 1996 Apr; 3(4):285-93. PubMed ID: 8796676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Film-screen versus digitized mammography: assessment of clinical equivalence.
    Powell KA; Obuchowski NA; Chilcote WA; Barry MM; Ganobcik SN; Cardenosa G
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1999 Oct; 173(4):889-94. PubMed ID: 10511142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography: image contrast and lesion characterization.
    Yamada T; Ishibashi T; Sato A; Saito M; Saito H; Matsuhashi T; Takahashi S
    Radiat Med; 2003; 21(4):166-71. PubMed ID: 14514123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. [Film-screen mammography versus digital storage plate mammography: hard copy and monitor display of microcalcifications and focal findings--a retrospective clinical and histologic analysis].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E; Aichinger U; Tartsch M; Kuchar I; Bödicker A; Evertsz C; Peitgen HO; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2003 Sep; 175(9):1220-4. PubMed ID: 12964077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 24.