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 *

119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11423248)

  • 21. Quality assurance of ultrasound systems: current status and review of literature.
    Grazhdani H; David E; Ventura Spagnolo O; Buemi F; Perri A; Orsogna N; Gigli S; Chimenz R
    J Ultrasound; 2018 Sep; 21(3):173-182. PubMed ID: 29949119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. A Swiss cheese error detection method for real-time EPID-based quality assurance and error prevention.
    Passarge M; Fix MK; Manser P; Stampanoni MF; Siebers JV
    Med Phys; 2017 Apr; 44(4):1212-1223. PubMed ID: 28134989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. A digital image analysis method for diagnostic ultrasound calibration.
    Zdero R; Fenton PV; Bryant JT
    Ultrasonics; 2002 Oct; 39(10):695-702. PubMed ID: 12479601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Ultrasound Probe Acceptance Testing Using the In-Air Reverberation Pattern.
    Dudley NJ
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2019 Jun; 45(6):1475-1482. PubMed ID: 30940416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Analysis and evaluation of a novel quality assurance device for ultrasonic medical imaging systems.
    Hah Z; Naum R
    IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2008 Oct; 55(10):2345-52. PubMed ID: 18986883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Guideline for Technical Quality Assurance (TQA) of ultrasound devices (B-Mode)--version 1.0 (July 2012): EFSUMB Technical Quality Assurance Group--US-TQA/B.
    Kollmann C; deKorte C; Dudley NJ; Gritzmann N; Martin K; Evans DH;
    Ultraschall Med; 2012 Dec; 33(6):544-9. PubMed ID: 23160776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Assessment of Repaired Diagnostic Ultrasound Probes.
    Dudley NJ; Woolley DJ
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2019 Oct; 45(10):2844-2850. PubMed ID: 31327490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. How perfect are you with defective probes? Information on the results of the mini-trial on technical quality assurance during the "Ultraschall 2012" conference in Davos.
    Rosenfeld E; Jenderka KV; Kopp A; Keim V
    Ultraschall Med; 2013 Apr; 34(2):185-8. PubMed ID: 23558398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Phantoms and automated system for testing the resolution of ultrasound scanners.
    Rownd JJ; Madsen EL; Zagzebski JA; Frank GR; Dong F
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 1997; 23(2):245-60. PubMed ID: 9140182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Position paper: recommendations for a digital mammography quality assurance program V4.0.
    Heggie JCP; Barnes P; Cartwright L; Diffey J; Tse J; Herley J; McLean ID; Thomson FJ; Grewal RK; Collins LT
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2017 Sep; 40(3):491-543. PubMed ID: 28914430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Quality assurance testing of transoesophageal echocardiography probes.
    McLeod C; McNeill K; McBride K; Inglis S; Pye SD
    Ultrasound; 2016 Nov; 24(4):198-204. PubMed ID: 27847534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. MRI quality assurance based on 3D FLAIR brain images.
    Peltonen JI; Mäkelä T; Salli E
    MAGMA; 2018 Dec; 31(6):689-699. PubMed ID: 30120616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. A quality assurance framework for the fully automated and objective evaluation of image quality in cone-beam computed tomography.
    Steiding C; Kolditz D; Kalender WA
    Med Phys; 2014 Mar; 41(3):031901. PubMed ID: 24593719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluations of UltraiQ software for objective ultrasound image quality assessment using images from a commercial scanner.
    Long Z; Tradup DJ; Stekel SF; Gorny KR; Hangiandreou NJ
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 Mar; 19(2):298-304. PubMed ID: 29336119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Performance tests of Doppler ultrasound equipment with a string phantom.
    Goldstein A
    J Ultrasound Med; 1991 Mar; 10(3):125-39. PubMed ID: 2027183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Obstetric ultrasound quality improvement initiative-utilization of a quality assurance process and standardized checklists.
    Mrazek-Pugh B; Blumenfeld YJ; Lee HC; Chueh J
    Am J Perinatol; 2015 May; 32(6):599-604. PubMed ID: 25730132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [Automated quality control of ultrasonic B-mode scanners by applying an TMM 3D cyst phantom].
    Satrapa J; Schultz HJ; Doblhoff G
    Ultraschall Med; 2006 Jun; 27(3):262-72. PubMed ID: 16767616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Early experience in the use of quantitative image quality measurements for the quality assurance of full field digital mammography x-ray systems.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Sep; 52(18):5545-68. PubMed ID: 17804881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Key performance parameters of a contemporary diagnostic ultrasound transducer.
    Moore GW
    Biomed Instrum Technol; 2010; 44(3):231-3. PubMed ID: 20715353
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A study of the relationship between routine ultrasound quality assurance parameters and subjective operator image assessment.
    Metcalfe SC; Evans JA
    Br J Radiol; 1992 Jul; 65(775):570-5. PubMed ID: 1515892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.