298 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12201434)
41. A search for optimal x-ray spectra in iodine contrast media mammography.
Ullman G; Sandborg M; Dance DR; Yaffe M; Alm Carlsson G
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Jul; 50(13):3143-52. PubMed ID: 15972986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Evaluation of dual-energy subtraction of digital mammography images under conditions found in a commercial unit.
Brandan ME; RamÃrez-R V
Phys Med Biol; 2006 May; 51(9):2307-20. PubMed ID: 16625044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: Glandular dose estimation using a Monte Carlo code and voxel phantom.
Tzamicha E; Yakoumakis E; Tsalafoutas IA; Dimitriadis A; Georgiou E; Tsapaki V; Chalazonitis A
Phys Med; 2015 Nov; 31(7):785-91. PubMed ID: 25900891
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Image quality, threshold contrast and mean glandular dose in CR mammography.
Jakubiak RR; Gamba HR; Neves EB; Peixoto JE
Phys Med Biol; 2013 Sep; 58(18):6565-83. PubMed ID: 24002695
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. 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]
46. Characterization of the homogeneous tissue mixture approximation in breast imaging dosimetry.
Sechopoulos I; Bliznakova K; Qin X; Fei B; Feng SS
Med Phys; 2012 Aug; 39(8):5050-9. PubMed ID: 22894430
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography.
Kruger RL; Schueler BA
Med Phys; 2001 Jul; 28(7):1449-54. PubMed ID: 11488578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. An edge spread technique for measurement of the scatter-to-primary ratio in mammography.
Cooper VN; Boone JM; Seibert JA; Pellot-Barakat CJ
Med Phys; 2000 May; 27(5):845-53. PubMed ID: 10841386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Optimal beam quality selection based on contrast-to-noise ratio and mean glandular dose in digital mammography.
Aminah M; Ng KH; Abdullah BJ; Jamal N
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2010 Dec; 33(4):329-34. PubMed ID: 20938762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. Incomplete skin representation in digital mammograms.
Burgess AE; Kang H
Med Phys; 2004 Oct; 31(10):2834-8. PubMed ID: 15543791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Compositional breast imaging using a dual-energy mammography protocol.
Laidevant AD; Malkov S; Flowers CI; Kerlikowske K; Shepherd JA
Med Phys; 2010 Jan; 37(1):164-74. PubMed ID: 20175478
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. Calibrated breast density methods for full field digital mammography: a system for serial quality control and inter-system generalization.
Lu B; Smallwood AM; Sellers TA; Drukteinis JS; Heine JJ; Fowler EE
Med Phys; 2015 Feb; 42(2):623-36. PubMed ID: 25652480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. The value of scatter removal by a grid in full field digital mammography.
Veldkamp WJ; Thijssen MA; Karssemeijer N
Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1712-8. PubMed ID: 12906188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Quantitative contrast-enhanced mammography for contrast medium kinetics studies.
Arvanitis CD; Speller R
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Oct; 54(20):6041-64. PubMed ID: 19779213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Improved image quality in digital mammography with image processing.
Baydush AH; Floyd CE
Med Phys; 2000 Jul; 27(7):1503-8. PubMed ID: 10947253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Evaluation of scatter effects on image quality for breast tomosynthesis.
Wu G; Mainprize JG; Boone JM; Yaffe MJ
Med Phys; 2009 Oct; 36(10):4425-32. PubMed ID: 19928073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. AEC for scanning digital mammography based on variation of scan velocity.
Aslund M; Cederström B; Lundqvist M; Danielsson M
Med Phys; 2005 Nov; 32(11):3367-74. PubMed ID: 16370424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Quantification of Al-equivalent thickness of just visible microcalcifications in full field digital mammograms.
Carton AK; Bosmans H; Vandenbroucke D; Souverijns G; Van Ongeval C; Dragusin O; Marchal G
Med Phys; 2004 Jul; 31(7):2165-76. PubMed ID: 15305471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. A simple, direct method for x-ray scatter estimation and correction in digital radiography and cone-beam CT.
Siewerdsen JH; Daly MJ; Bakhtiar B; Moseley DJ; Richard S; Keller H; Jaffray DA
Med Phys; 2006 Jan; 33(1):187-97. PubMed ID: 16485425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Characterization of scatter in digital mammography from physical measurements.
Leon SM; Brateman LF; Wagner LK
Med Phys; 2014 Jun; 41(6):061901. PubMed ID: 24877812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
