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 *

176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21335333)

  • 1. Patient doses from screen-film and full-field digital mammography in a population-based screening programme.
    Hauge IH; Pedersen K; Sanderud A; Hofvind S; Olerud HM
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Jan; 148(1):65-73. PubMed ID: 21335333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A survey of patient dose and clinical factors in a full-field digital mammography system.
    Morán P; Chevalier M; Ten JI; Fernández Soto JM; Vañó E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):375-9. PubMed ID: 15933140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography in a population-based screening program: The Sogn and Fjordane study.
    Juel IM; Skaane P; Hoff SR; Johannessen G; Hofvind S
    Acta Radiol; 2010 Nov; 51(9):962-8. PubMed ID: 20942729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparison within the UK breast screening program and systematic review of published data.
    Vinnicombe S; Pinto Pereira SM; McCormack VA; Shiel S; Perry N; Dos Santos Silva IM
    Radiology; 2009 May; 251(2):347-58. PubMed ID: 19401569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Screen-film mammography versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: randomized trial in a population-based screening program--the Oslo II Study.
    Skaane P; Skjennald A
    Radiology; 2004 Jul; 232(1):197-204. PubMed ID: 15155893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose.
    Berns EA; Hendrick RE; Cutter GR
    Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):334-40. PubMed ID: 12674233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of radiologist performance with photon-counting full-field digital mammography to conventional full-field digital mammography.
    Cole EB; Toledano AY; Lundqvist M; Pisano ED
    Acad Radiol; 2012 Aug; 19(8):916-22. PubMed ID: 22537503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. [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]  

  • 11. Breast cancer: missed interval and screening-detected cancer at full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography-- results from a retrospective review.
    Hoff SR; Abrahamsen AL; Samset JH; Vigeland E; Klepp O; Hofvind S
    Radiology; 2012 Aug; 264(2):378-86. PubMed ID: 22700555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and final results of Oslo II study.
    Skaane P; Hofvind S; Skjennald A
    Radiology; 2007 Sep; 244(3):708-17. PubMed ID: 17709826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Analysis of patient dose in full field digital mammography.
    Chen B; Wang Y; Sun X; Guo W; Zhao M; Cui G; Hu L; Li P; Ren Y; Feng J; Yu J
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 May; 81(5):868-72. PubMed ID: 21397423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: a review in the Irish breast screening program.
    Hambly NM; McNicholas MM; Phelan N; Hargaden GC; O'Doherty A; Flanagan FL
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2009 Oct; 193(4):1010-8. PubMed ID: 19770323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Average glandular dose with amorphous silicon full-field digital mammography - Clinical results.
    Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Marten K; Kehbel S; Fischer U; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 2002 Jun; 174(6):696-9. PubMed ID: 12063597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of the accuracy of film-screen mammography, full-field digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Michell MJ; Iqbal A; Wasan RK; Evans DR; Peacock C; Lawinski CP; Douiri A; Wilson R; Whelehan P
    Clin Radiol; 2012 Oct; 67(10):976-81. PubMed ID: 22625656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of acquisition parameters and breast dose in digital mammography and screen-film mammography in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network digital mammographic imaging screening trial.
    Hendrick RE; Pisano ED; Averbukh A; Moran C; Berns EA; Yaffe MJ; Herman B; Acharyya S; Gatsonis C
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Feb; 194(2):362-9. PubMed ID: 20093597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Breast cancer screening results 5 years after introduction of digital mammography in a population-based screening program.
    Karssemeijer N; Bluekens AM; Beijerinck D; Deurenberg JJ; Beekman M; Visser R; van Engen R; Bartels-Kortland A; Broeders MJ
    Radiology; 2009 Nov; 253(2):353-8. PubMed ID: 19703851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of mean glandular dose in a full-field digital mammography unit in Tabriz, Iran.
    Alizadeh Riabi H; Mehnati P; Mesbahi A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010 Dec; 142(2-4):222-7. PubMed ID: 20823039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Breast Radiation Dose With CESM Compared With 2D FFDM and 3D Tomosynthesis Mammography.
    James JR; Pavlicek W; Hanson JA; Boltz TF; Patel BK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Feb; 208(2):362-372. PubMed ID: 28112559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.