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.
206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1561354)
1. Detection of subtle microcalcifications: comparison of computed radiography and screen-film mammography. Higashida Y; Moribe N; Morita K; Katsuda N; Hatemura M; Takada T; Takahashi M; Yamashita J Radiology; 1992 May; 183(2):483-6. PubMed ID: 1561354 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Digital mammography. ROC studies of the effects of pixel size and unsharp-mask filtering on the detection of subtle microcalcifications. Chan HP; Vyborny CJ; MacMahon H; Metz CE; Doi K; Sickles EA Invest Radiol; 1987 Jul; 22(7):581-9. PubMed ID: 3623862 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Computed radiography versus screen-film mammography in detection of simulated microcalcifications: a receiver operating characteristic study based on phantom images. Shaw CC; Wang T; King JL; Breitenstein DS; Chang TS; Harris KM; Baratz AB; Ganott MA; Reginella R; Sumkin JH; Gur D Acad Radiol; 1998 Mar; 5(3):173-80. PubMed ID: 9522883 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of two screen-film combinations in contact and magnification mammography: detectability of microcalcifications. Oestmann JW; Kopans DB; Linetsky L; Hall DA; McCarthy KA; White G; Swann C; Kelley JE; Johnson LL Radiology; 1988 Sep; 168(3):657-9. PubMed ID: 3406394 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. New CR system with pixel size of 50 microm for digital mammography: physical imaging properties and detection of subtle microcalcifications. Ideguchi T; Higashida Y; Kawaji Y; Sasaki M; Zaizen M; Shibayama R; Nakamura Y; Koyanagi K; Ikeda H; Ohki M; Toyofuku F; Muranaka T Radiat Med; 2004; 22(4):218-24. PubMed ID: 15468941 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Improvement of detectability of microcalcifications by magnification digital mammography]. Higashida Y; Hatemura M; Yoshida A; Takada T; Takahashi M Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1998 Aug; 58(9):473-8. PubMed ID: 9778932 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. A comparison of digitized storage phosphors and conventional mammography in the detection of malignant microcalcifications. Oestmann JW; Kopans D; Hall DA; McCarthy KA; Rubens JR; Greene R Invest Radiol; 1988 Oct; 23(10):725-8. PubMed ID: 3192395 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A clinical comparison between conventional and digital mammography utilizing computed radiography. Brettle DS; Ward SC; Parkin GJ; Cowen AR; Sumsion HJ Br J Radiol; 1994 May; 67(797):464-8. PubMed ID: 8193893 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [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]
11. The simulation of 3D microcalcification clusters in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis. Shaheen E; Van Ongeval C; Zanca F; Cockmartin L; Marshall N; Jacobs J; Young KC; R Dance D; Bosmans H Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6659-71. PubMed ID: 22149848 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Mammographic microcalcifications: detection with xerography, screen-film, and digitized film display. Smathers RL; Bush E; Drace J; Stevens M; Sommer FG; Brown BW; Karras B Radiology; 1986 Jun; 159(3):673-7. PubMed ID: 3704149 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Efficacy of storage phosphor-based digital mammography in diagnosis of breast cancer--comparison with film-screen mammography]. Kitahama H Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1991 May; 51(5):547-60. PubMed ID: 1651472 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [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]
15. Magnification mammography: a comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for the detection of simulated small masses and microcalcifications. Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Funke M; Grabbe EH Eur Radiol; 2002 Sep; 12(9):2188-91. PubMed ID: 12195468 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Digital storage phosphor mammography in a magnification technic: experimental studies for spatial resolution and for detection of microcalcifications]. Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Hundertmark C; Sachs J; Gruhl T; Sperner W; Grabbe E Rofo; 1997 Aug; 167(2):174-9. PubMed ID: 9333359 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A quantitative method for evaluating the detectability of lesions in digital mammography. Zanca F; Van Ongeval C; Jacobs J; Marchal G; Bosmans H Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):214-8. PubMed ID: 18319282 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Full-field digital mammography: a phantom study for detection of microcalcification]. Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Schorn C; Funke M; Fischer U; Grabbe E Rofo; 2000 Jul; 172(7):646-50. PubMed ID: 10962993 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Film-screen magnification versus electronic magnification and enhancement of digitized contact mammograms in the assessment of subtle microcalcifications. Perisinakis K; Damilakis J; Kontogiannis E; Gourtsoyiannis N Invest Radiol; 2001 Dec; 36(12):726-33. PubMed ID: 11753144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Visibility of microcalcifications in computed and screen-film mammography. Cowen AR; Launders JH; Jadav M; Brettle DS Phys Med Biol; 1997 Aug; 42(8):1533-48. PubMed ID: 9279904 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]