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)

  • 61. Diagnostic quality of mammograms obtained with a new low-radiation-dose dual-screen and dual-emulsion film combination.
    Wojtasek DA; Teixidor HS; Govoni AF; Gareen IF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1990 Feb; 154(2):265-70. PubMed ID: 2105011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. The positive predictive value for diagnosis of breast cancer full-field digital mammography versus film-screen mammography in the diagnostic mammographic population.
    Seo BK; Pisano ED; Kuzmiak CM; Koomen M; Pavic D; McLelland R; Lee Y; Cole EB; Mattingly D; Lee J
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Oct; 13(10):1229-35. PubMed ID: 16979072
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. [Experimental studies on image quality in conventional film screen system, digital phosphor storage plate mammography in mangnification technique and digital mammography in CCD-technique].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2000 Dec; 172(12):965-8. PubMed ID: 11199438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. [Digital image magnification mammography with the storage-screen technique. Standardized and findings-oriented image processing parameters].
    Hundertmark C; Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Grabbe E
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1997 May; 7(3):135-40. PubMed ID: 9296608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial: objectives and methodology.
    Pisano ED; Gatsonis CA; Yaffe MJ; Hendrick RE; Tosteson AN; Fryback DG; Bassett LW; Baum JK; Conant EF; Jong RA; Rebner M; D'Orsi CJ
    Radiology; 2005 Aug; 236(2):404-12. PubMed ID: 15961755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Quality control for digital mammography: part II. Recommendations from the ACRIN DMIST trial.
    Yaffe MJ; Bloomquist AK; Mawdsley GE; Pisano ED; Hendrick RE; Fajardo LL; Boone JM; Kanal K; Mahesh M; Fleischman RC; Och J; Williams MB; Beideck DJ; Maidment AD
    Med Phys; 2006 Mar; 33(3):737-52. PubMed ID: 16878576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. [Digital mammography with high-resolution storage plates (CR) versus full-field digital mammography (CCD) (DR) for microcalcifications and focal lesions -- a retrospective clinical histologic analysis (n = 102)].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Lell M; Wenkel E; Böhner C; Dassel MS; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2005 Jan; 177(1):67-71. PubMed ID: 15657822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 68. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.
    Pisano ED; Gatsonis C; Hendrick E; Yaffe M; Baum JK; Acharyya S; Conant EF; Fajardo LL; Bassett L; D'Orsi C; Jong R; Rebner M;
    N Engl J Med; 2005 Oct; 353(17):1773-83. PubMed ID: 16169887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. New CR system with pixel size of 50 microm for digital mammography: physical imaging properties and detection of subtle microcalcifications.
    Ideguchi T; Higashida Y; Kawaji Y; Sasaki M; Zaizen M; Shibayama R; Nakamura Y; Koyanagi K; Ikeda H; Ohki M; Toyofuku F; Muranaka T
    Radiat Med; 2004; 22(4):218-24. PubMed ID: 15468941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Comparison of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography: image quality and lesion detection.
    Fischmann A; Siegmann KC; Wersebe A; Claussen CD; Müller-Schimpfle M
    Br J Radiol; 2005 Apr; 78(928):312-5. PubMed ID: 15774591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Detection of subtle microcalcifications: comparison of computed radiography and screen-film mammography.
    Higashida Y; Moribe N; Morita K; Katsuda N; Hatemura M; Takada T; Takahashi M; Yamashita J
    Radiology; 1992 May; 183(2):483-6. PubMed ID: 1561354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Mammographic microcalcifications: detection with xerography, screen-film, and digitized film display.
    Smathers RL; Bush E; Drace J; Stevens M; Sommer FG; Brown BW; Karras B
    Radiology; 1986 Jun; 159(3):673-7. PubMed ID: 3704149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. [The diagnostic accuracy of a digital mammography system with photostimulable storage phosphors used with automatic reading].
    Panizza P; Rodighiero MG; De Gaspari A; Tacchini S; Camalori M; Del Maschio A
    Radiol Med; 1996; 91(1-2):46-51. PubMed ID: 8614730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Use of digital mammography in needle localization procedures.
    Dershaw DD; Fleischman RC; Liberman L; Deutch B; Abramson AF; Hann L
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Sep; 161(3):559-62. PubMed ID: 8352104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. [Capacities of digital mammography in screening].
    Belotserkovtseva LD; Klimova NV; Samatova TB; Agapova NA
    Vestn Rentgenol Radiol; 2008; (4-6):33-6. PubMed ID: 21337748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. Contrast-detail detectability analysis: comparison of a digital spot mammography system and an analog screen-film mammography system.
    Liu H; Fajardo LL; Barrett JR; Baxter RA
    Acad Radiol; 1997 Mar; 4(3):197-203. PubMed ID: 9084777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. Improved microcalcification visualization using dual-energy digital mammography.
    Tsai CJ; Chen RC; Peng HL; Hsu WL; Lee JJ
    Acta Radiol; 2013 Jul; 54(6):614-21. PubMed ID: 23528569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Detection of clustered microcalcifications in small field digital mammography.
    Arodź T; Kurdziel M; Popiela TJ; Sevre EO; Yuen DA
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2006 Jan; 81(1):56-65. PubMed ID: 16310282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. The first trial of phase contrast imaging for digital full-field mammography using a practical molybdenum x-ray tube.
    Tanaka T; Honda C; Matsuo S; Noma K; Oohara H; Nitta N; Ota S; Tsuchiya K; Sakashita Y; Yamada A; Yamasaki M; Furukawa A; Takahashi M; Murata K
    Invest Radiol; 2005 Jul; 40(7):385-96. PubMed ID: 15973129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Effect of image quality on calcification detection in digital mammography.
    Warren LM; Mackenzie A; Cooke J; Given-Wilson RM; Wallis MG; Chakraborty DP; Dance DR; Bosmans H; Young KC
    Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6):3202-13. PubMed ID: 22755704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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