298 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19175081)
41. Optimization of a dual-energy contrast-enhanced technique for a photon-counting digital breast tomosynthesis system: II. An experimental validation.
Carton AK; Ullberg C; Maidment AD
Med Phys; 2010 Nov; 37(11):5908-13. PubMed ID: 21158303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
42. Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise.
Reiser I; Nishikawa RM
Med Phys; 2010 Apr; 37(4):1591-600. PubMed ID: 20443480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. Amorphous In-Ga-Zn-O thin-film transistor active pixel sensor x-ray imager for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Kanicki J
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091902. PubMed ID: 25186389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
44. Digital x-ray imaging using amorphous selenium: reduction of aliasing.
Ji WG; Zhao W; Rowlands JA
Med Phys; 1998 Nov; 25(11):2148-62. PubMed ID: 9829239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. Task-based modeling and optimization of a cone-beam CT scanner for musculoskeletal imaging.
Prakash P; Zbijewski W; Gang GJ; Ding Y; Stayman JW; Yorkston J; Carrino JA; Siewerdsen JH
Med Phys; 2011 Oct; 38(10):5612-29. PubMed ID: 21992379
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. Cascaded systems analysis of noise and detectability in dual-energy cone-beam CT.
Gang GJ; Zbijewski W; Webster Stayman J; Siewerdsen JH
Med Phys; 2012 Aug; 39(8):5145-56. PubMed ID: 22894440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. 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]
48. High resolution stationary digital breast tomosynthesis using distributed carbon nanotube x-ray source array.
Qian X; Tucker A; Gidcumb E; Shan J; Yang G; Calderon-Colon X; Sultana S; Lu J; Zhou O; Spronk D; Sprenger F; Zhang Y; Kennedy D; Farbizio T; Jing Z
Med Phys; 2012 Apr; 39(4):2090-9. PubMed ID: 22482630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Human observer performance on in-plane digital breast tomosynthesis images: Effects of reconstruction filters and data acquisition angles on signal detection.
Lee C; Han M; Baek J
PLoS One; 2020; 15(3):e0229915. PubMed ID: 32163472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. An iterative reconstruction algorithm for digital breast tomosynthesis imaging using real data at three radiation doses.
Polat A; Yildirim I
J Xray Sci Technol; 2018; 26(3):347-360. PubMed ID: 29504549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. Optimized image acquisition for breast tomosynthesis in projection and reconstruction space.
Chawla AS; Lo JY; Baker JA; Samei E
Med Phys; 2009 Nov; 36(11):4859-69. PubMed ID: 19994493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
52. A comparison of reconstruction algorithms for C-arm mammography tomosynthesis.
Rakowski JT; Dennis MJ
Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):3018-32. PubMed ID: 16964880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
53. Characterizing a novel scintillating glass for application to megavoltage cone-beam computed tomography.
Hu YH; Shedlock D; Wang A; Rottmann J; Baturin P; Myronakis M; Huber P; Fueglistaller R; Shi M; Morf D; Star-Lack J; Berbeco RI
Med Phys; 2019 Mar; 46(3):1323-1330. PubMed ID: 30586163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Effect of source blur on digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction.
Zheng J; Fessler JA; Chan HP
Med Phys; 2019 Dec; 46(12):5572-5592. PubMed ID: 31494953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Improved digital breast tomosynthesis images using automated ultrasound.
Zhang X; Yuan J; Du S; Kripfgans OD; Wang X; Carson PL; Liu X
Med Phys; 2014 Jun; 41(6):061911. PubMed ID: 24877822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Evaluation of back projection methods for breast tomosynthesis image reconstruction.
Zhou W; Lu J; Zhou O; Chen Y
J Digit Imaging; 2015 Jun; 28(3):338-45. PubMed ID: 25384538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. Physical evaluation of a needle photostimulable phosphor based CR mammography system.
Marshall NW; Lemmens K; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):811-24. PubMed ID: 22320791
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. Characteristic performance evaluation of a photon counting Si strip detector for low dose spectral breast CT imaging.
Cho HM; Barber WC; Ding H; Iwanczyk JS; Molloi S
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091903. PubMed ID: 25186390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Statistical iterative reconstruction to improve image quality for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Xu S; Lu J; Zhou O; Chen Y
Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 42(9):5377-90. PubMed ID: 26328987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Evaluating the sensitivity of the optimization of acquisition geometry to the choice of reconstruction algorithm in digital breast tomosynthesis through a simulation study.
Zeng R; Park S; Bakic P; Myers KJ
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Feb; 60(3):1259-88. PubMed ID: 25591807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
