379 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12375196)
1. [Experiences with phantom measurements in different mammographic systems].
Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Lell M; Kuchar I; Bautz W
Rofo; 2002 Oct; 174(10):1243-6. PubMed ID: 12375196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [Image quality and radiation exposure in digital mammography with storage phosphor screens in a magnification technic].
Fiedler E; Aichinger U; Böhner C; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Bautz W
Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):60-4. PubMed ID: 10464507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Experimental investigations at the new digital mammographic system].
Schulz-Wendtland R; Lell M; Wenkel E; Aichinger U; Imhoff K; Bautz W
Rofo; 2003 Nov; 175(11):1564-6. PubMed ID: 14610710
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a flat-panel x-ray detector based on amorphous silicon in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography].
Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Grabbe E
Rofo; 2000 Nov; 172(11):940-5. PubMed ID: 11142129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. [Phantom study for the detection of simulated lesions in five different digital and one conventional mammography system].
Schulz-Wendtland R; Hermann KP; Lell M; Böhner C; Wenkel E; Imhoff K; Schmid A; Krug B; Bautz W
Rofo; 2004 Aug; 176(8):1127-32. PubMed ID: 15346289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Experimental investigations for dose reduction by optimizing the radiation quality for digital mammography with an a-Se detector].
Schulz-Wendtland R; Hermann KP; Wenkel E; Böhner C; Lell M; Dassel MS; Bautz WA
Rofo; 2007 May; 179(5):487-91. PubMed ID: 17436182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Direct digital magnification mammography with a large-surface detector made of amorphous silicon].
Hermann KP; Hundertmark C; Funke M; von Brenndorff A; Grabbe E
Rofo; 1999 May; 170(5):503-6. PubMed ID: 10370416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with a conventional screen film system (SFS) and a new full-field digital mammography unit (DR) with a-Se-detector.
Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E; Schmid A; Imhoff K; Bautz W
Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):766-8. PubMed ID: 12811687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD).
Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Wenkel E; Bautz W
Rontgenpraxis; 2001; 54(4):123-6. PubMed ID: 11883115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a selenium flat-panel detector].
Gosch D; Jendrass S; Scholz M; Kahn T
Rofo; 2006 Jul; 178(7):693-7. PubMed ID: 16761214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Average glandular dose with amorphous silicon full-field digital mammography - Clinical results.
Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Marten K; Kehbel S; Fischer U; Grabbe E
Rofo; 2002 Jun; 174(6):696-9. PubMed ID: 12063597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Experimental phantom lesion detectability study using a digital breast tomosynthesis prototype system.
Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E; Lell M; Böhner C; Bautz WA; Mertelmeier T
Rofo; 2006 Dec; 178(12):1219-23. PubMed ID: 17136645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A survey of patient dose and clinical factors in a full-field digital mammography system.
Morán P; Chevalier M; Ten JI; Fernández Soto JM; Vañó E
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):375-9. PubMed ID: 15933140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [DIMA-magnification mammography. Phantom studies on image quality and radiation exposure of the patient].
Hermann KP; Funke M; Brüggemeyer H; Sperner W; Gruhl T; Koch R
Rofo; 1997 Sep; 167(3):304-10. PubMed ID: 9376560
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [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]
16. Storage phosphor and film-screen mammography: performance with different mammographic techniques.
Kheddache S; Thilander-Klang A; Lanhede B; Månsson LG; Bjurstam N; Ackerholm P; Björneld L
Eur Radiol; 1999; 9(4):591-7. PubMed ID: 10354868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Image quality measurements and metrics in full field digital mammography: an overview.
Bosmans H; Carton AK; Rogge F; Zanca F; Jacobs J; Van Ongeval C; Nijs K; Van Steen A; Marchal G
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):120-30. PubMed ID: 16461531
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [ROC analysis comparing screen film mammography and digital mammography].
Gaspard-Bakhach S; Dilhuydy MH; Bonichon F; Barreau B; Henriques C; Maugey-Laulom B
J Radiol; 2000 Feb; 81(2):133-9. PubMed ID: 10705143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Storage phosphor direct magnification mammography in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography--a phantom study.
Funke M; Breiter N; Hermann KP; Oestmann JW; Grabbe E
Br J Radiol; 1998 May; 71(845):528-34. PubMed ID: 9691898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Are phantoms useful for predicting the potential of dose reduction in full-field digital mammography?
Gennaro G; Katz L; Souchay H; Alberelli C; di Maggio C
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Apr; 50(8):1851-70. PubMed ID: 15815100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
