266 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15337422)
1. Digital mammography.
Lewin JM; D'Orsi CJ; Hendrick RE
Radiol Clin North Am; 2004 Sep; 42(5):871-84, vi. PubMed ID: 15337422
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Digital mammography, computer-aided diagnosis, and telemammography.
Feig SA; Yaffe MJ
Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1205-30. PubMed ID: 7480666
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Advantages of magnification in digital phase-contrast mammography using a practical X-ray tube.
Honda C; Ohara H
Eur J Radiol; 2008 Dec; 68(3 Suppl):S69-72. PubMed ID: 18584984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Digital mammography: are there advantages in screening for breast cancer?
Nees AV
Acad Radiol; 2008 Apr; 15(4):401-7. PubMed ID: 18342763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Update in digital mammography.
Hogge JP; Artz DS; Freedman MT
Crit Rev Diagn Imaging; 1997; 38(1):89-113. PubMed ID: 9063622
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Image quality performance of liquid crystal display systems: influence of display resolution, magnification and window settings on contrast-detail detection.
Bacher K; Smeets P; De Hauwere A; Voet T; Duyck P; Verstraete K; Thierens H
Eur J Radiol; 2006 Jun; 58(3):471-9. PubMed ID: 16442770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. [X-ray phase imaging using a X-ray tube with a small focal spot -improvement of image quality in mammography-].
Honda C; Ohara H; Ishisaka A; Shimada F; Endo T
Igaku Butsuri; 2002; 22(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 12766293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Can the average glandular dose in routine digital mammography screening be reduced? A pilot study using revised image quality criteria.
Hemdal B; Andersson I; Grahn A; Håkansson M; Ruschin M; Thilander-Klang A; Båth M; Börjesson S; Medin J; Tingberg A; Månsson LG; Mattsson S
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):383-8. PubMed ID: 15933142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Digital mammography and computer assisted diagnosis].
Stines J; Noël A; Lévy L; Séradour B; Heid P
J Radiol; 2002 Apr; 83(4 Pt 2):581-90. PubMed ID: 12075167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical evaluation of a new set of image quality criteria for mammography.
Grahn A; Hemdal B; Andersson I; Ruschin M; Thilander-Klang A; Börjesson S; Tingberg A; Mattsson S; Håkansson M; Båth M; Månsson LG; Medin J; Wanninger F; Panzer W
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):389-94. PubMed ID: 15933143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Application of European protocol in the evaluation of contrast-to-noise ratio and mean glandular dose for two digital mammography systems.
Muhogora WE; Devetti A; Padovani R; Msaki P; Bonutti F
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):231-6. PubMed ID: 18283065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. For mammography, it's digital vs. screen-film.
D'Orsi CJ; Karellas A
Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1999 Nov; Suppl Digital():D16-8. PubMed ID: 10724730
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of the performance of modern screen-film and digital mammography systems.
Monnin P; Gutierrez D; Bulling S; Lepori D; Valley JF; Verdun FR
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Jun; 50(11):2617-31. PubMed ID: 15901958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Digital mammography: novel applications.
Rafferty EA
Radiol Clin North Am; 2007 Sep; 45(5):831-43, vii. PubMed ID: 17888772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Advanced applications of digital mammography: tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced digital mammography.
Lewin JM; Niklason L
Semin Roentgenol; 2007 Oct; 42(4):243-52. PubMed ID: 17919527
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Assessment of radiographic screen-film systems: a comparison between the use of a microdensitometer and a drum film digitiser.
Verdun FR; Pachoud M; Bergmann D; Buhr E
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):208-13. PubMed ID: 15933110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Digital mammography.
Pisano ED; Yaffe MJ
Radiology; 2005 Feb; 234(2):353-62. PubMed ID: 15670993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
