146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21416317)
21. [CR-mammography with pixel size of 50 microm and dual-sided reading system: effect of the oblique incident of the X-ray beam on imaging properties and detection].
Ideguchi T; Higashida Y; Akazawa F; Kawaji Y; Zaizen M; Sasaki M; Nakamura Y; Ohki M; Toyofuku F; Ikeda H
Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2005 Jun; 61(6):833-9. PubMed ID: 15995614
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. [Comparison between electronic zoom and geometric magnification of clusters of microcalcifications on digital mammography].
Moraux-Wallyn M; Chaveron C; Bachelle F; Taieb S; Ceugnart L
J Radiol; 2010 Sep; 91(9 Pt 1):879-83. PubMed ID: 20814375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. [Digital image magnification mammography with the storage-screen technique. Standardized and findings-oriented image processing parameters].
Hundertmark C; Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Grabbe E
Aktuelle Radiol; 1997 May; 7(3):135-40. PubMed ID: 9296608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A quantitative method for evaluating the detectability of lesions in digital mammography.
Zanca F; Van Ongeval C; Jacobs J; Marchal G; Bosmans H
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):214-8. PubMed ID: 18319282
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The simulation of 3D microcalcification clusters in 2D digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
Shaheen E; Van Ongeval C; Zanca F; Cockmartin L; Marshall N; Jacobs J; Young KC; R Dance D; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2011 Dec; 38(12):6659-71. PubMed ID: 22149848
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [The demonstration of microcalcification in breast core biopsies: DIMA specimen radiography (7x) compared to the histopathological findings].
Grunert JH; Borchert B; Kuske M; Farber A; Gmelin E
Rofo; 1999 Apr; 170(4):347-50. PubMed ID: 10341792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Detection of subtle microcalcifications: comparison of computed radiography and screen-film mammography.
Higashida Y; Moribe N; Morita K; Katsuda N; Hatemura M; Takada T; Takahashi M; Yamashita J
Radiology; 1992 May; 183(2):483-6. PubMed ID: 1561354
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. [ROC analysis of image quality in digital luminescence radiography in comparison with current film-screen systems in mammography].
Wiebringhaus R; John V; Müller RD; Hirche H; Voss M; Callies R
Aktuelle Radiol; 1995 Jul; 5(4):263-7. PubMed ID: 7548257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Magnification mammography: a low-dose technique.
Arnold BA; Eisenberg H; Bjarngard BE
Radiology; 1979 Jun; 131(3):743-9. PubMed ID: 441382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Visibility of simulated microcalcifications--a hardcopy-based comparison of three mammographic systems.
Lai CJ; Shaw CC; Whitman GJ; Johnston DA; Yang WT; Selinko V; Arribas E; Dogan B; Kappadath SC
Med Phys; 2005 Jan; 32(1):182-94. PubMed ID: 15719969
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Magnification survey and spot view mammography with a new microfocus X-ray unit: detail resolution and radiation exposure.
Funke M; Breiter N; Hermann K; Oestmann J; Grabbe E
Eur Radiol; 1998; 8(3):386-90. PubMed ID: 9510570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Computed radiography versus screen-film mammography in detection of simulated microcalcifications: a receiver operating characteristic study based on phantom images.
Shaw CC; Wang T; King JL; Breitenstein DS; Chang TS; Harris KM; Baratz AB; Ganott MA; Reginella R; Sumkin JH; Gur D
Acad Radiol; 1998 Mar; 5(3):173-80. PubMed ID: 9522883
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. A Monte Carlo study of the influence of focal spot size, intensity distribution, breast thickness and magnification on spatial resolution of an a-Se digital mammography system using the generalized MTF.
Sakellaris T; Koutalonis M; Spyrou G; Pascoal A
Phys Med; 2014 May; 30(3):286-95. PubMed ID: 24011672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Characterization of microcalcification: can digital monitor zooming replace magnification mammography in full-field digital mammography?
Kim MJ; Kim EK; Kwak JY; Son EJ; Youk JH; Choi SH; Han M; Oh KK
Eur Radiol; 2009 Feb; 19(2):310-7. PubMed ID: 18677486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. [Considerations on direct magnification in radiology].
San Nicolò M; Moroder E
Radiol Med; 1986; 72(7-8):579-83. PubMed ID: 3737993
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. [X-ray phase imaging using a X-ray tube with a small focal spot -improvement of image quality in mammography-].
Honda C; Ohara H; Ishisaka A; Shimada F; Endo T
Igaku Butsuri; 2002; 22(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 12766293
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Diagnosis of breast calcifications: comparison of contact, magnified, and television-enhanced images.
Kimme-Smith C; Gold RH; Bassett LW; Gormley L; Morioka C
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 Nov; 153(5):963-7. PubMed ID: 2801445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Investigation of optimum anti-scatter grid selection for digital radiography: physical imaging properties and detectability of low-contrast signals.
Tanaka N; Naka K; Saito A; Morishita J; Toyofuku F; Ohki M; Higashida Y
Radiol Phys Technol; 2013 Jan; 6(1):54-60. PubMed ID: 22872419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Digital zoom of the full-field digital mammogram versus magnification mammography: a systematic review.
Øynes M; Strøm B; Tveito B; Hafslund B
Eur Radiol; 2020 Aug; 30(8):4223-4233. PubMed ID: 32222798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Image quality in mammography with special reference to anti-scatter grids and the magnification technique.
Nielsen B; Fagerberg G
Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh); 1986; 27(4):467-79. PubMed ID: 3776678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
