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.
129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18940818)
1. Survey of mammography practice in Croatia: equipment performance, image quality and dose. Faj D; Posedel D; Stimac D; Ivezic Z; Kasabasic M; Ivkovic A; Kubelka D; Ilakovac V; Brnic Z; Bjelac OC Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 131(4):535-40. PubMed ID: 18940818 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Implementation of the European protocol for quality control of the technical aspects of mammography screening in Bulgaria. Vassileva J; Avramova-Cholakova S; Dimov A; Lichev A Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):403-5. PubMed ID: 15933146 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A survey of the state of mammography practice in Bulgaria. Avramova-Cholakova S; Vassileva J Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):184-6. PubMed ID: 21831863 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. [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]
6. Review of the first 50 cases completed by the RACR mammography QA programme: phantom image quality, processor control and dose considerations. McLean D; Eckert M; Heard R; Chan W Australas Radiol; 1997 Nov; 41(4):387-91. PubMed ID: 9409037 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Individual doses for women undergoing screening mammography examinations in Poland in 2007. Fabiszewska E; Jankowska K; Grabska I; Skrzyński W J Radiol Prot; 2011 Dec; 31(4):467-75. PubMed ID: 22088977 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Image quality and dose in mammography in 17 countries in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe: results from IAEA projects. Ciraj-Bjelac O; Avramova-Cholakova S; Beganovic A; Economides S; Faj D; Gershan V; Grupetta E; Kharita MH; Milakovic M; Milu C; Muhogora WE; Muthuvelu P; Oola S; Setayeshi S; Schandorf C; Ursulean I; Videnovic IR; Zaman A; Ziliukas J; Rehani MM Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81(9):2161-8. PubMed ID: 21665395 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Experimental investigations for dose reduction by optimizing the radiation quality for digital mammography with an a-Se detector]. Schulz-Wendtland R; Hermann KP; Wenkel E; Böhner C; Lell M; Dassel MS; Bautz WA Rofo; 2007 May; 179(5):487-91. PubMed ID: 17436182 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Mammography radiation dose: initial results from Serbia based on mean glandular dose assessment for phantoms and patients. Ciraj-Bjelac O; Beciric S; Arandjic D; Kosutic D; Kovacevic M Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010 Jun; 140(1):75-80. PubMed ID: 20159918 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Getting started with protocol for quality assurance of digital mammography in the clinical centre of Montenegro. Ivanovic S; Bosmans H; Mijovic S Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Jul; 165(1-4):363-8. PubMed ID: 25862535 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Absorbed radiation dose of the female breast during diagnostic multidetector chest CT and dose reduction with a tungsten-antimony composite breast shield: preliminary results. Parker MS; Kelleher NM; Hoots JA; Chung JK; Fatouros PP; Benedict SH Clin Radiol; 2008 Mar; 63(3):278-88. PubMed ID: 18275868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A survey on performance status of mammography machines: image quality and dosimetry studies using a standard mammography imaging phantom. Sharma R; Sharma SD; Mayya YS Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Jul; 150(3):325-33. PubMed ID: 22090414 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Mammography dosimetry using an in-house developed polymethyl methacrylate phantom. Sharma R; Sharma SD; Mayya YS; Chourasiya G Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Aug; 151(2):379-85. PubMed ID: 22232773 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Performance of mammography equipment in the Macedonian breast screening campaign 2008/2009. Gershan V; Antevska-Grujoska S Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):187-91. PubMed ID: 21733866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Bulgarian experience in the establishment of reference dose levels and implementation of a quality control system in diagnostic radiology. Vassileva J; Dimov A; Slavchev A; Karadjov A Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):131-4. PubMed ID: 16464832 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Towards a proposition of a diagnostic (dose) reference level for mammographic acquisitions in breast screening measurements in Belgium. Smans K; Bosmans H; Xiao M; Carton AK; Marchal G Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):321-6. PubMed ID: 16464839 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]