124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15147618)
1. Factors affecting increasing radiation dose for mammography in North Carolina from 1997 through 2001: an analysis of Food and Drug Administration annual surveys.
Pisano ED; Chiu YF; Ni L; Li Y; Britt GG; Johnson RE; Burns B; Cole E; Kuzmiak C; Koomen M; Pavic D
Acad Radiol; 2004 May; 11(5):536-43. PubMed ID: 15147618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Factors affecting decreasing radiation dose for mammography in North Carolina after 2002: an analysis of Food and Drug Administration annual surveys.
Kuzmiak CM; Pisano ED; Chung Y; Britt GG; Burns B; Cole E
Acad Radiol; 2007 Jun; 14(6):685-91. PubMed ID: 17502258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Has the mammography quality standards act affected the mammography quality in North Carolina?
Pisano ED; Schell M; Rollins J; Burns CB; Hall B; Lin Y; Braeuning MP; Burke E; Holliday J
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2000 Apr; 174(4):1089-91. PubMed ID: 10749257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Mammography "dose creep": causes and solutions.
Seibert JA
Acad Radiol; 2004 May; 11(5):487-8. PubMed ID: 15147612
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Mammography in the 1990s: the United States and Canada.
Suleiman OH; Spelic DC; McCrohan JL; Symonds GR; Houn F
Radiology; 1999 Feb; 210(2):345-51. PubMed ID: 10207413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Factors affecting phantom scores at annual mammography facility inspections by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Pisano ED; Britt GG; Lin Y; Schell MJ; Burns CB; Brown ME
Acad Radiol; 2001 Sep; 8(9):864-70. PubMed ID: 11724041
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Medical devices; Mammography Quality Standards Act of 1992; inspection fees--FDA. Notice.
Fed Regist; 1995 Mar; 60(52):14584-6. PubMed ID: 10141780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. MQSA (Mammography Quality Standards Act) update--focusing on quality assurance.
Butler PF
Radiol Manage; 1998; 20(4):40-50. PubMed ID: 10181471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Medical devices; Mammography Quality Standards Act of 1992; inspection fees--FDA. Notice.
Fed Regist; 1998 Jan; 63(9):2245-8. PubMed ID: 10177337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Quality mammography standards--FDA. Proposed rule.
Fed Regist; 1998 Nov; 63(214):59750-1. PubMed ID: 10187387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The negative impact of MQSA (Mammography Quality Standards Act) on rural mammography programs.
Inman M
Radiol Manage; 1998; 20(4):31-9. PubMed ID: 10181470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Legislative and regulatory mandates for mammography quality assurance.
Fintor L; Alciati MH; Fischer R
J Public Health Policy; 1995; 16(1):81-107. PubMed ID: 7738160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. State certification of mammography facilities. Final rule.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS
Fed Regist; 2002 Feb; 67(25):5446-69. PubMed ID: 11852885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The Mammography Quality Standards Act of 1992. History and philosophy.
Houn F; Elliott ML; McCrohan JL
Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1059-65. PubMed ID: 7480655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 1998 MQSA (Mammography Quality Standards Act) final rule released. American College of Radiology.
Radiol Manage; 1998; 20(4):51-5. PubMed ID: 10181472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Average glandular dose in routine mammography screening using a Sectra MicroDose Mammography unit.
Hemdal B; Herrnsdorf L; Andersson I; Bengtsson G; Heddson B; Olsson M
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):436-43. PubMed ID: 15933152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Intra-individual comparison of average glandular dose of two digital mammography units using different anode/filter combinations.
Engelken FJ; Meyer H; Juran R; Bick U; Fallenberg E; Diekmann F
Acad Radiol; 2009 Oct; 16(10):1272-80. PubMed ID: 19632866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Average glandular dose conversion coefficients for segmented breast voxel models.
Zankl M; Fill U; Hoeschen C; Panzer W; Regulla D
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):410-4. PubMed ID: 15933148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Mammography in the eighties.
Conway BJ; McCrohan JL; Rueter FG; Suleiman OH
Radiology; 1990 Nov; 177(2):335-9. PubMed ID: 2217765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [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]
[Next] [New Search]
