298 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19175081)
61. Large area CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray imager for digital breast tomosynthesis: Analysis, modeling, and characterization.
Zhao C; Kanicki J; Konstantinidis AC; Patel T
Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 42(11):6294-308. PubMed ID: 26520722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
62. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISATION OF FOUR DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS SYSTEMS.
Ortenzia O; Rossi R; Bertolini M; Nitrosi A; Ghetti C
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2018 Oct; 181(3):277-289. PubMed ID: 29462366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
63. Digital tomosynthesis: technique.
Yaffe MJ; Mainprize JG
Radiol Clin North Am; 2014 May; 52(3):489-97. PubMed ID: 24792651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
64. Effects on image quality of a 2D antiscatter grid in x-ray digital breast tomosynthesis: Initial experience using the dual modality (x-ray and molecular) breast tomosynthesis scanner.
Patel T; Peppard H; Williams MB
Med Phys; 2016 Apr; 43(4):1720. PubMed ID: 27036570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
65. Selective-diffusion regularization for enhancement of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction.
Lu Y; Chan HP; Wei J; Hadjiiski LM
Med Phys; 2010 Nov; 37(11):6003-14. PubMed ID: 21158312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
66. A fast, angle-dependent, analytical model of CsI detector response for optimization of 3D x-ray breast imaging systems.
Freed M; Park S; Badano A
Med Phys; 2010 Jun; 37(6):2593-605. PubMed ID: 20632571
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
67. MTF and DQE enhancement using an apodized-aperture x-ray detector design.
Nano TF; Escartin T; Ismailova E; Karim KS; Lindström J; Kim HK; Cunningham IA
Med Phys; 2017 Sep; 44(9):4525-4535. PubMed ID: 28636792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
68. Evaluation of reconstruction algorithms for a stationary digital breast tomosynthesis system using a carbon nanotube X-ray source array.
Hu Z; Chen Z; Zhou C; Hong X; Chen J; Zhang Q; Jiang C; Ge Y; Yang Y; Liu X; Zheng H; Li Z; Liang D
J Xray Sci Technol; 2020; 28(6):1157-1169. PubMed ID: 32925159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
69. Optimization of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) acquisition parameters for human observers: effect of reconstruction algorithms.
Zeng R; Badano A; Myers KJ
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Apr; 62(7):2598-2611. PubMed ID: 28151728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
70. Analysis of the detective quantum efficiency of a developmental detector for digital mammography.
Williams MB; Simoni PU; Smilowitz L; Stanton M; Phillips W; Stewart A
Med Phys; 1999 Nov; 26(11):2273-85. PubMed ID: 10587208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
71. Experimental phantom lesion detectability study using a digital breast tomosynthesis prototype system.
Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E; Lell M; Böhner C; Bautz WA; Mertelmeier T
Rofo; 2006 Dec; 178(12):1219-23. PubMed ID: 17136645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
72. Anisotropic imaging performance in breast tomosynthesis.
Badano A; Kyprianou IS; Jennings RJ; Sempau J
Med Phys; 2007 Nov; 34(11):4076-91. PubMed ID: 18074617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
73. Evaluation of digital breast tomosynthesis reconstruction algorithms using synchrotron radiation in standard geometry.
Bliznakova K; Kolitsi Z; Speller RD; Horrocks JA; Tromba G; Pallikarakis N
Med Phys; 2010 Apr; 37(4):1893-903. PubMed ID: 20443511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
74. Retrospective analysis of a detector fault for a full field digital mammography system.
Marshall NW
Phys Med Biol; 2006 Nov; 51(21):5655-73. PubMed ID: 17047276
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
75. A novel pre-processing technique for improving image quality in digital breast tomosynthesis.
Kim H; Lee T; Hong J; Sabir S; Lee JR; Choi YW; Kim HH; Chae EY; Cho S
Med Phys; 2017 Feb; 44(2):417-425. PubMed ID: 28032909
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
76. Signal and noise transfer properties of photoelectric interactions in diagnostic x-ray imaging detectors.
Hajdok G; Yao J; Battista JJ; Cunningham IA
Med Phys; 2006 Oct; 33(10):3601-20. PubMed ID: 17089826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
77. Grating-based phase contrast tomosynthesis imaging: proof-of-concept experimental studies.
Li K; Ge Y; Garrett J; Bevins N; Zambelli J; Chen GH
Med Phys; 2014 Jan; 41(1):011903. PubMed ID: 24387511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
78. Optimal photon energy comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and mammography: a case study.
Di Maria S; Baptista M; Felix M; Oliveira N; Matela N; Janeiro L; Vaz P; Orvalho L; Silva A
Phys Med; 2014 Jun; 30(4):482-8. PubMed ID: 24613514
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
79. High-resolution imager for digital mammography: physical characterization of a prototype sensor.
Suryanarayanan S; Karellas A; Vedantham S; Onishi SK
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Sep; 50(17):3957-69. PubMed ID: 16177523
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
80. Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype.
Vedantham S; Karellas A; Suryanarayanan S; Albagli D; Han S; Tkaczyk EJ; Landberg CE; Opsahl-Ong B; Granfors PR; Levis I; D'Orsi CJ; Hendrick RE
Med Phys; 2000 Mar; 27(3):558-67. PubMed ID: 10757607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
