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.
345 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12811687)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. [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]
5. [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]
6. Image quality of digital direct flat-panel mammography versus an analog screen-film technique using a low-contrast phantom. Krug KB; Stützer H; Schröder R; Boecker J; Poggenborg J; Lackner K AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Sep; 191(3):W80-8. PubMed ID: 18716083 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [First experiments for the detection of simulated mammographic lesions: digital full field mammography with a new detector with a double plate of pure selenium]. Schulz-Wendtland R; Hermann KP; Wenkel E; Adamietz B; Lell M; Anders K; Uder M Radiologe; 2011 Feb; 51(2):130-4. PubMed ID: 21069512 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Visualization of microcalcifications on mammographies obtained by digital full-field mammography in comparison to conventional film-screen mammography]. Diekmann S; Bick U; von Heyden H; Diekmann F Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):775-9. PubMed ID: 12811689 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [ROC analysis of image quality in digital luminescence radiography in comparison with current film-screen systems in mammography]. Wiebringhaus R; John V; Müller RD; Hirche H; Voss M; Callies R Aktuelle Radiol; 1995 Jul; 5(4):263-7. PubMed ID: 7548257 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [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]
11. Dose reduction in full-field digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study. Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Grabbe E Br J Radiol; 2003 Jul; 76(907):478-82. PubMed ID: 12857708 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [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]
13. [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]
14. Image quality of digital direct flat-panel mammography versus an analog screen-film technique using a phantom model. Krug KB; Stützer H; Girnus R; Zähringer M; Gossmann A; Winnekendonk G; Lackner K AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):399-407. PubMed ID: 17242248 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer. Lewin JM; D'Orsi CJ; Hendrick RE; Moss LJ; Isaacs PK; Karellas A; Cutter GR AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Sep; 179(3):671-7. PubMed ID: 12185042 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A comparison of digital and screen-film mammography using quality control phantoms. Undrill PE; O'Kane AD; Gilbert FJ Clin Radiol; 2000 Oct; 55(10):782-90. PubMed ID: 11052880 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Physical and technical aspects of digital mammography]. Hermann KP; Funke M; Grabbe E Radiologe; 2002 Apr; 42(4):256-60. PubMed ID: 12063731 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of detector dynamic range in the x-ray exposure domain in mammography: a comparison between film-screen and flat panel detector systems. Cooper VN; Oshiro T; Cagnon CH; Bassett LW; McLeod-Stockmann TM; Bezrukiy NV Med Phys; 2003 Oct; 30(10):2614-21. PubMed ID: 14596297 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Clinical trial of mammography with film-screen-combinations. Part 1: Selection of a suitable film-screen system]. Säbel M; Paterok EM; Weishaar J; Willgeroth F Rontgenpraxis; 1981; 34(11):458-66. PubMed ID: 7313855 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. [Dose reduction through gridless technique in digital full-field mammography]. Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Berzeg S; Bick U; Fischer T; Hamm B Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):769-74. PubMed ID: 12811688 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]