504 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12607843)
1. Imaging performance of amorphous selenium based flat-panel detectors for digital mammography: characterization of a small area prototype detector.
Zhao W; Ji WG; Debrie A; Rowlands JA
Med Phys; 2003 Feb; 30(2):254-63. PubMed ID: 12607843
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of the imaging properties of an amorphous selenium-based flat panel detector for digital fluoroscopy.
Hunt DC; Tousignant O; Rowlands JA
Med Phys; 2004 May; 31(5):1166-75. PubMed ID: 15191306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Digital radiology using active matrix readout of amorphous selenium: theoretical analysis of detective quantum efficiency.
Zhao W; Rowlands JA
Med Phys; 1997 Dec; 24(12):1819-33. PubMed ID: 9434965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Measured and calculated K-fluorescence effects on the MTF of an amorphous-selenium based CCD x-ray detector.
Hunter DM; Belev G; Kasap S; Yaffe MJ
Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):608-22. PubMed ID: 22320770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Amorphous selenium flat panel detectors for digital mammography: validation of a NPWE model observer with CDMAM observer performance experiments.
Segui JA; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2006 Oct; 33(10):3711-22. PubMed ID: 17089837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effect of amorphous selenium detector thickness on dual-energy digital breast imaging.
Hu YH; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2014 Nov; 41(11):111904. PubMed ID: 25370637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Accurate MTF measurement in digital radiography using noise response.
Kuhls-Gilcrist A; Jain A; Bednarek DR; Hoffmann KR; Rudin S
Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):724-35. PubMed ID: 20229882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Imaging properties of digital magnification radiography.
Boyce SJ; Samei E
Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):984-96. PubMed ID: 16696475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Digital radiology using active matrix readout of amorphous selenium: construction and evaluation of a prototype real-time detector.
Zhao W; Blevis I; Germann S; Rowlands JA; Waechter D; Huang Z
Med Phys; 1997 Dec; 24(12):1834-43. PubMed ID: 9434966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Performance of a high fill factor, indirect detection prototype flat-panel imager for mammography.
El-Mohri Y; Antonuk LE; Zhao Q; Wang Y; Li Y; Du H; Sawant A
Med Phys; 2007 Jan; 34(1):315-27. PubMed ID: 17278517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Nonstationary model of oblique x-ray incidence in amorphous selenium detectors: II. Transfer functions.
Acciavatti RJ; Maidment ADA
Med Phys; 2019 Feb; 46(2):505-516. PubMed ID: 30488455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Analysis of the detective quantum efficiency of a developmental detector for digital mammography.
Williams MB; Simoni PU; Smilowitz L; Stanton M; Phillips W; Stewart A
Med Phys; 1999 Nov; 26(11):2273-85. PubMed ID: 10587208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Experimental validation of a three-dimensional linear system model for breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao B; Zhou J; Hu YH; Mertelmeier T; Ludwig J; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2009 Jan; 36(1):240-51. PubMed ID: 19235392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Segmented phosphors: MEMS-based high quantum efficiency detectors for megavoltage x-ray imaging.
Sawant A; Antonuk LE; El-Mohri Y; Li Y; Su Z; Wang Y; Yamamoto J; Zhao Q; Du H; Daniel J; Street R
Med Phys; 2005 Feb; 32(2):553-65. PubMed ID: 15789602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Three-dimensional linear system analysis for breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao B; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2008 Dec; 35(12):5219-32. PubMed ID: 19175081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Physical evaluation of a needle photostimulable phosphor based CR mammography system.
Marshall NW; Lemmens K; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):811-24. PubMed ID: 22320791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system.
Marshall NW
Phys Med Biol; 2006 May; 51(10):2441-63. PubMed ID: 16675862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. System performance of a prototype flat-panel imager operated under mammographic conditions.
Jee KW; Antonuk LE; El-Mohri Y; Zhao Q
Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1874-90. PubMed ID: 12906206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Performance of electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) used in radiotherapy: image quality and dose measurements.
Cremers F; Frenzel T; Kausch C; Albers D; Schönborn T; Schmidt R
Med Phys; 2004 May; 31(5):985-96. PubMed ID: 15191282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
