123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1878377)
1. [Film-screen combinations for mammography].
Säbel M; Aichinger H
Aktuelle Radiol; 1991 May; 1(3):105-12. PubMed ID: 1878377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Recent advances in screen-film mammography.
Haus AG
Radiol Clin North Am; 1987 Sep; 25(5):913-28. PubMed ID: 3306773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Global quality control perspective for the physical and technical aspects of screen-film mammography--image quality and radiation dose.
Ng KH; Jamal N; DeWerd L
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 121(4):445-51. PubMed ID: 16709704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Artifacts in digital mammography.
Van Ongeval C; Jacobs J; Bosmans H
JBR-BTR; 2008; 91(6):262-3. PubMed ID: 19203002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Quality assurance in screening mammography.
Health Devices; 1990; 19(5-6):152-98. PubMed ID: 2372321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Picture quality and film mammography. I. The physical parameters of the filming system (gradation, sensitivity, definition and granularity) and the effect of exposure geometry (author's transl)].
Friedrich M; Weskamp P
Rofo; 1976 Sep; 125(3):269-79. PubMed ID: 134958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Breast cancer screening--the European experience.
Perry NM
Int J Fertil Womens Med; 2004; 49(5):228-30. PubMed ID: 15633481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Film quality in film mammography. Article II: Signal/noise ratio of the recording system as a quantitative measure of quality. Final evaluation of recording systems (author's transl)].
Friedrich M; Weskamp P
Rofo; 1976 Nov; 125(5):461-71. PubMed ID: 137194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [What kind of information do German health information pamphlets provide on mammography screening?].
Kurzenhäuser S
Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2003 Feb; 97(1):53-7. PubMed ID: 12669690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Process indicators from ten centres in the Finnish breast cancer screening programme from 1991 to 2000.
Sarkeala T; Anttila A; Forsman H; Luostarinen T; Saarenmaa I; Hakama M
Eur J Cancer; 2004 Sep; 40(14):2116-25. PubMed ID: 15341987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [The technical support of mammography].
Rozhkova NI; Chikirdin EG; Riudiger IuG; Kochetova GP; Lisachenko IV; Iakobs OE
Med Tekh; 2000; (5):45-7. PubMed ID: 11076366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Mammogram results in ambulatory care--a mammography quality circle in Braunschweig, Germany, between 1998 and 2001].
Derra M; Green E; Hintner H; Hübler R; Sabih S; Thieme H; Wezler U; Robra BP; Swart E
Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich; 2004 Aug; 98(5):375-81. PubMed ID: 15487384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Complex evaluation of film mammographic imaging systems. 2. Comparison of 18 systems using a signal-noise matrix].
Friedrich M; Weskamp P
Rofo; 1984 Jun; 140(6):707-16. PubMed ID: 6429790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Confrontation of mammography systems in flanders with the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in mammography screening. Analysis of initial results.
Bosmans H; Carton AK; Deprez T; Rogge F; Van Steen A; Van Limbergen E; Marchal G
JBR-BTR; 1999 Dec; 82(6):288-93. PubMed ID: 10670170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quality control in mammography.
Hendrick RE; Botsco M; Plott CM
Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1041-57. PubMed ID: 7480654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography.
Dimakopoulou AD; Tsalafoutas IA; Georgiou EK; Yakoumakis EN
Br J Radiol; 2006 Feb; 79(938):123-9. PubMed ID: 16489193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Measurements of the frequency distribution of optical density in screening mammography.
Kotre CJ; Robson KJ; Faulkner K
Br J Radiol; 1994 Sep; 67(801):856-9. PubMed ID: 7953226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
