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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10841387)

  • 1. Using light sensitometry to evaluate mammography film performance.
    West MS; Spelic DC
    Med Phys; 2000 May; 27(5):854-60. PubMed ID: 10841387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of light and x-ray sensitometric responses of double-emulsion films for different processing conditions.
    Blendl C; Buhr E
    Med Phys; 2001 Dec; 28(12):2420-6. PubMed ID: 11797944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Method of simulated screen sensitometry for asymmetric, low crossover medical x-ray films.
    Dickerson RE; Haus AG; Baker CW
    Med Phys; 1994 Apr; 21(4):525-8. PubMed ID: 8058018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography.
    Dimakopoulou AD; Tsalafoutas IA; Georgiou EK; Yakoumakis EN
    Br J Radiol; 2006 Feb; 79(938):123-9. PubMed ID: 16489193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Checking the consistency of sensitometers and film processors in a mammographic screening programme.
    Law J
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Feb; 69(818):143-7. PubMed ID: 8785642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Sensitometry of Mammographic Screen-film System Using Bootstrap Aluminum Step-Wedge.].
    Abe S; Imada R; Terauchi T; Fujisaki T; Monma M; Nishimura K; Saitoh H; Mochizuki Y
    Igaku Butsuri; 2005; 25(4):165-72. PubMed ID: 16479054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Quality control in mammography.
    Hendrick RE; Botsco M; Plott CM
    Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1041-57. PubMed ID: 7480654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Mammography film processor replenishment rate: bromide level monitoring.
    Kimme-Smith C; Wuelfing P; Kitts EL; Cagnon C; Basic M; Bassett L
    Med Phys; 1997 Mar; 24(3):369-72. PubMed ID: 9089588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Sensitometric responses of selected medical radiographic films.
    Kofler JM; Gray JE
    Radiology; 1991 Dec; 181(3):879-83. PubMed ID: 1947114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Modified inverse square sensitometry for the determination of the characteristic curve of radiographic screen/film systems.
    Yoshida A; Hiraki Y; Ohkawa Y; Yamada T; Hashimoto K; Aono K
    Acta Med Okayama; 1986 Feb; 40(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 3962729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Problems associated with simulated light sensitometry for low-crossover medical x-ray films.
    Haus AG; Dickerson RE
    Med Phys; 1990; 17(4):691-5. PubMed ID: 2215416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Mammography screen-film selection: individual facility testing technique.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett L; Gold RH; Parkinson B
    Med Phys; 1992; 19(5):1195-9. PubMed ID: 1435598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Film-screen mammography x-ray tube anodes: molybdenum versus tungsten.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett LW; Gold RH; Rothschild P
    Med Phys; 1989; 16(2):279-83. PubMed ID: 2716707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The use of a contrast-detail test object in the optimization of optical density in mammography.
    Robson KJ; Kotre CJ; Faulkner K
    Br J Radiol; 1995 Mar; 68(807):277-82. PubMed ID: 7735767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Assessment of radiographic screen-film systems: a comparison between the use of a microdensitometer and a drum film digitiser.
    Verdun FR; Pachoud M; Bergmann D; Buhr E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):208-13. PubMed ID: 15933110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Performance tests for mammographic film-screen combinations: use of absolute techniques.
    Bor D; Akdur K
    Diagn Interv Radiol; 2013; 19(5):360-70. PubMed ID: 23603122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Optimizing techniques in screen-film mammography.
    Hendrick RE; Berns EA
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2000 Jul; 38(4):701-18, viii. PubMed ID: 10943272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Slit camera focal spot measurement errors in mammography.
    Tang S; Barnes GT; Tanner RL
    Med Phys; 1995 Nov; 22(11 Pt 1):1803-14. PubMed ID: 8587535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of detector dynamic range in the x-ray exposure domain in mammography: a comparison between film-screen and flat panel detector systems.
    Cooper VN; Oshiro T; Cagnon CH; Bassett LW; McLeod-Stockmann TM; Bezrukiy NV
    Med Phys; 2003 Oct; 30(10):2614-21. PubMed ID: 14596297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.