298 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12201434)
1. A calibration approach to glandular tissue composition estimation in digital mammography.
Kaufhold J; Thomas JA; Eberhard JW; Galbo CE; Trotter DE
Med Phys; 2002 Aug; 29(8):1867-80. PubMed ID: 12201434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Dual-energy digital mammography: calibration and inverse-mapping techniques to estimate calcification thickness and glandular-tissue ratio.
Kappadath SC; Shaw CC
Med Phys; 2003 Jun; 30(6):1110-7. PubMed ID: 12852535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The impact of calibration phantom errors on dual-energy digital mammography.
Mou X; Chen X; Sun L; Yu H; Ji Z; Zhang L
Phys Med Biol; 2008 Nov; 53(22):6321-36. PubMed ID: 18936520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effects of exposure equalization on image signal-to-noise ratios in digital mammography: a simulation study with an anthropomorphic breast phantom.
Liu X; Lai CJ; Whitman GJ; Geiser WR; Shen Y; Yi Y; Shaw CC
Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6489-501. PubMed ID: 22149832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A technique optimization protocol and the potential for dose reduction in digital mammography.
Ranger NT; Lo JY; Samei E
Med Phys; 2010 Mar; 37(3):962-9. PubMed ID: 20384232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Quantitative evaluation of dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging.
Kappadath SC; Shaw CC
Phys Med Biol; 2004 Jun; 49(12):2563-76. PubMed ID: 15272674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. X-ray scattering in full-field digital mammography.
Nykänen K; Siltanen S
Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1864-73. PubMed ID: 12906205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Dual-energy digital mammography for calcification imaging: scatter and nonuniformity corrections.
Kappadath SC; Shaw CC
Med Phys; 2005 Nov; 32(11):3395-408. PubMed ID: 16372415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose.
Berns EA; Hendrick RE; Cutter GR
Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):334-40. PubMed ID: 12674233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quantification of breast arterial calcification using full field digital mammography.
Molloi S; Xu T; Ducote J; Iribarren C
Med Phys; 2008 Apr; 35(4):1428-39. PubMed ID: 18491538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Validation of MTF measurement for digital mammography quality control.
Carton AK; Vandenbroucke D; Struye L; Maidment AD; Kao YH; Albert M; Bosmans H; Marchal G
Med Phys; 2005 Jun; 32(6):1684-95. PubMed ID: 16013727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to contrast and spatial resolution in tissue equivalent breast phantoms.
Kuzmiak CM; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Zeng D; Burns CB; Roberto C; Pavic D; Lee Y; Seo BK; Koomen M; Washburn D
Med Phys; 2005 Oct; 32(10):3144-50. PubMed ID: 16279068
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Monte Carlo simulation for the estimation of the glandular breast dose for a digital breast tomosynthesis system.
Rodrigues L; Magalhaes LA; Braz D
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Dec; 167(4):576-83. PubMed ID: 25480841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Algorithmic scatter correction in dual-energy digital mammography.
Chen X; Nishikawa RM; Chan ST; Lau BA; Zhang L; Mou X
Med Phys; 2013 Nov; 40(11):111919. PubMed ID: 24320452
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Fully iterative scatter corrected digital breast tomosynthesis using GPU-based fast Monte Carlo simulation and composition ratio update.
Kim K; Lee T; Seong Y; Lee J; Jang KE; Choi J; Choi YW; Kim HH; Shin HJ; Cha JH; Cho S; Ye JC
Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 42(9):5342-55. PubMed ID: 26328983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Quantification of breast density with dual energy mammography: an experimental feasibility study.
Ducote JL; Molloi S
Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):793-801. PubMed ID: 20229889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Scatter rejection in multislit digital mammography.
Aslund M; Cederström B; Lundqvist M; Danielsson M
Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):933-40. PubMed ID: 16696469
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Scatter radiation in digital tomosynthesis of the breast.
Sechopoulos I; Suryanarayanan S; Vedantham S; D'Orsi CJ; Karellas A
Med Phys; 2007 Feb; 34(2):564-76. PubMed ID: 17388174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Error analysis of calibration materials on dual-energy mammography.
Mou X; Chen X
Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv; 2007; 10(Pt 2):596-603. PubMed ID: 18044617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. On the noise variance of a digital mammography system.
Burgess A
Med Phys; 2004 Jul; 31(7):1987-95. PubMed ID: 15305451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
