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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15614218)

  • 1. [Effect of breast composition on patient exposure in mammography].
    Asada Y; Suzuki S; Yamada M; Sakurai K; Susa H; Maeda S; Ito M; Takeuchi Y; Shirakawa H
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2004 Dec; 60(12):1675-81. PubMed ID: 15614218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients.
    Klein R; Aichinger H; Dierker J; Jansen JT; Joite-Barfuss S; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Zoetelief J
    Phys Med Biol; 1997 Apr; 42(4):651-71. PubMed ID: 9127443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Spectral dependence of glandular tissue dose in screen-film mammography.
    Wu X; Barnes GT; Tucker DM
    Radiology; 1991 Apr; 179(1):143-8. PubMed ID: 2006265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography.
    Kruger RL; Schueler BA
    Med Phys; 2001 Jul; 28(7):1449-54. PubMed ID: 11488578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Normalized average glandular dose in magnification mammography.
    Liu B; Goodsitt M; Chan HP
    Radiology; 1995 Oct; 197(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 7568836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessment of mean glandular dose in mammography.
    Faulkner K; Law J; Robson KJ
    Br J Radiol; 1995 Aug; 68(812):877-81. PubMed ID: 7551786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Average glandular dose with amorphous silicon full-field digital mammography - Clinical results.
    Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Marten K; Kehbel S; Fischer U; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 2002 Jun; 174(6):696-9. PubMed ID: 12063597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Estimating mean glandular dose using proprietary mammography phantoms.
    Hartley LD; Cobb BJ; Hutchinson DE
    Appl Radiat Isot; 1999 Jan; 50(1):205-13. PubMed ID: 10028638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Normalized mean glandular dose computation from mammography using GATE: a validation study.
    Myronakis ME; Zvelebil M; Darambara DG
    Phys Med Biol; 2013 Apr; 58(7):2247-65. PubMed ID: 23475310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of fixed and variable kVp technique protocols for film-screen mammography.
    McParland BJ; Boyd MM
    Br J Radiol; 2000 Jun; 73(870):613-26. PubMed ID: 10911785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
    Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D
    Rofo; 2012 Oct; 184(10):911-8. PubMed ID: 22711250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Radiation exposure in x-ray mammography].
    Säbel M; Aichinger U; Schulz-Wendtland R
    Rofo; 2001 Feb; 173(2):79-91. PubMed ID: 11253092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Variations in breast doses for an automatic mammography unit.
    Bor D; Tükel S; Olgar T; Aydin E
    Diagn Interv Radiol; 2008 Sep; 14(3):122-6. PubMed ID: 18814131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Entrance skin exposure and mean glandular dose: effect of scatter and field gradient at mammography.
    Ng KH; Aus RJ; DeWerd LA; Vetter JR
    Radiology; 1997 Nov; 205(2):395-8. PubMed ID: 9356619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Monte Carlo simulation of average glandular dose and an investigation of influencing factors.
    Nigapruke K; Puwanich P; Phaisangittisakul N; Youngdee W
    J Radiat Res; 2010; 51(4):441-8. PubMed ID: 20523013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A new mammography dosimetric phantom.
    Almeida CD; Coutinho CM; Dantas BM; Peixoto JE; Koch HA
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Aug; 151(1):196-8. PubMed ID: 22223722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Doses in mammography: from the phantom to the patient.
    Cross P
    Australas Radiol; 1994 Feb; 38(1):20-3. PubMed ID: 8147794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of mean glandular dose in a full-field digital mammography unit in Tabriz, Iran.
    Alizadeh Riabi H; Mehnati P; Mesbahi A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010 Dec; 142(2-4):222-7. PubMed ID: 20823039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Breast dose in mammography is about 30% lower when realistic heterogeneous glandular distributions are considered.
    Hernandez AM; Seibert JA; Boone JM
    Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 42(11):6337-48. PubMed ID: 26520725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Technique factors and their relationship to radiation dose in pendant geometry breast CT.
    Boone JM; Kwan AL; Seibert JA; Shah N; Lindfors KK; Nelson TR
    Med Phys; 2005 Dec; 32(12):3767-76. PubMed ID: 16475776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.