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 *

156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20095266)

  • 21. Image quality, threshold contrast and mean glandular dose in CR mammography.
    Jakubiak RR; Gamba HR; Neves EB; Peixoto JE
    Phys Med Biol; 2013 Sep; 58(18):6565-83. PubMed ID: 24002695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: executive summary of AAPM TG18 report.
    Samei E; Badano A; Chakraborty D; Compton K; Cornelius C; Corrigan K; Flynn MJ; Hemminger B; Hangiandreou N; Johnson J; Moxley-Stevens DM; Pavlicek W; Roehrig H; Rutz L; Shepard J; Uzenoff RA; Wang J; Willis CE;
    Med Phys; 2005 Apr; 32(4):1205-25. PubMed ID: 15895604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Evaluation of an automated grid artifact detection system for quality control in digital mammography.
    MacLellan CJ; Layman RR; Geiser W; Gress DA; Jones AK
    Med Phys; 2019 Aug; 46(8):3442-3450. PubMed ID: 31116445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. SU-E-I-101: Initial Implementation and Evaluation of AAPM TG-150 Draft Image Receptor Non-Uniformity Testing Recommendations.
    Dave J; Gingold E; Yorkston J; Bercha I; Goldman L; Walz-Flannigan A; Willis C
    Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6Part5):3648. PubMed ID: 28517653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Automated analysis of phantom images for the evaluation of long-term reproducibility in digital mammography.
    Gennaro G; Ferro F; Contento G; Fornasin F; di Maggio C
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Mar; 52(5):1387-407. PubMed ID: 17301461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Results of an automatic evaluation of test images according to PAS 1054 and IEC 6220-1-2 on different types of digital mammographic units].
    Blendl C; Schreiber AC; Buhr H
    Rofo; 2009 Oct; 181(10):979-88. PubMed ID: 19676013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Investigation of detector uniformity issues for Siemens Inspiration systems.
    Baldelli P; Keavey E; Manley M; Power G; Phelan N
    Phys Med; 2020 Jan; 69():262-268. PubMed ID: 31927263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Image quality assessment in digital mammography: part I. Technical characterization of the systems.
    Marshall NW; Monnin P; Bosmans H; Bochud FO; Verdun FR
    Phys Med Biol; 2011 Jul; 56(14):4201-20. PubMed ID: 21701051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Which phantom is better for assessing the image quality in full-field digital mammography?: American College of Radiology Accreditation phantom versus digital mammography accreditation phantom.
    Song SE; Seo BK; Yie A; Ku BK; Kim HY; Cho KR; Chung HH; Lee SH; Hwang KW
    Korean J Radiol; 2012; 13(6):776-83. PubMed ID: 23118577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Dose sensitivity of three phantoms used for quality assurance in digital mammography.
    Figl M; Semturs F; Kaar M; Hoffmann R; Kaldarar H; Homolka P; Mostbeck G; Scholz B; Hummel J
    Phys Med Biol; 2013 Jan; 58(2):N13-23. PubMed ID: 23257608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Quality assurance of computed and digital radiography systems.
    Walsh C; Gorman D; Byrne P; Larkin A; Dowling A; Malone JF
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):271-5. PubMed ID: 18319281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The current status of full-field digital mammography quality control.
    Williams MB; Goodale PJ; Butler PF
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2004 Dec; 1(12):936-51. PubMed ID: 17411736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Computer analysis of mammography phantom images (CAMPI): an application to the measurement of microcalcification image quality of directly acquired digital images.
    Chakraborty DP
    Med Phys; 1997 Aug; 24(8):1269-77. PubMed ID: 9284251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Improved image quality of cone beam CT scans for radiotherapy image guidance using fiber-interspaced antiscatter grid.
    Stankovic U; van Herk M; Ploeger LS; Sonke JJ
    Med Phys; 2014 Jun; 41(6):061910. PubMed ID: 24877821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to contrast and spatial resolution in tissue equivalent breast phantoms.
    Kuzmiak CM; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Zeng D; Burns CB; Roberto C; Pavic D; Lee Y; Seo BK; Koomen M; Washburn D
    Med Phys; 2005 Oct; 32(10):3144-50. PubMed ID: 16279068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Performance evaluation of a retrofit digital detector-based mammography system.
    Marshall NW; van Ongeval C; Bosmans H
    Phys Med; 2016 Feb; 32(2):312-22. PubMed ID: 26803225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. An alternative method for noise analysis using pixel variance as part of quality control procedures on digital mammography systems.
    Bouwman R; Young K; Lazzari B; Ravaglia V; Broeders M; van Engen R
    Phys Med Biol; 2009 Nov; 54(22):6809-22. PubMed ID: 19847017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Image quality measurements and metrics in full field digital mammography: an overview.
    Bosmans H; Carton AK; Rogge F; Zanca F; Jacobs J; Van Ongeval C; Nijs K; Van Steen A; Marchal G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):120-30. PubMed ID: 16461531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Typetesting of physical characteristics of digital mammography systems for screening within the Flemish breast cancer screening programme.
    Thierens H; Bosmans H; Buls N; De Hauwere A; Bacher K; Jacobs J; Clerinx P
    Eur J Radiol; 2009 Jun; 70(3):539-48. PubMed ID: 18374533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Establishing minimum performance standards, calibration intervals, and optimal exposure values for a whole breast digital mammography unit.
    Kimme-Smith C; Lewis C; Beifuss M; Williams MB; Bassett LW
    Med Phys; 1998 Dec; 25(12):2410-6. PubMed ID: 9874835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.