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 *

90 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21427314)

  • 1. Development of an adjustable model breast for mammographic dosimetry assessment in Taiwanese women.
    Dong SL; Chu TC; Lan GY; Lin YC; Yeh YH; Chuang KS
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Apr; 196(4):W476-81. PubMed ID: 21427314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Determination of equivalent breast phantoms for different age groups of Taiwanese women: an experimental approach.
    Dong SL; Chu TC; Lin YC; Lan GY; Yeh YH; Chen S; Chuanga KS
    Med Phys; 2011 Jul; 38(7):4094-100. PubMed ID: 21859009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Breast thickness in routine mammograms: effect on image quality and radiation dose.
    Helvie MA; Chan HP; Adler DD; Boyd PG
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Dec; 163(6):1371-4. PubMed ID: 7992731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Dosimetric evaluation of the mean glandular dose for mammography in Korean women: a preliminary report.
    Oh KK; Hur J; Kim EK; Choo SS
    Yonsei Med J; 2003 Oct; 44(5):863-8. PubMed ID: 14584104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
    Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D
    Rofo; 2012 Oct; 184(10):911-8. PubMed ID: 22711250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Composition of mammographic phantom materials.
    Geise RA; Palchevsky A
    Radiology; 1996 Feb; 198(2):347-50. PubMed ID: 8596830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients.
    Klein R; Aichinger H; Dierker J; Jansen JT; Joite-Barfuss S; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Zoetelief J
    Phys Med Biol; 1997 Apr; 42(4):651-71. PubMed ID: 9127443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Mammography dosimetry using an in-house developed polymethyl methacrylate phantom.
    Sharma R; Sharma SD; Mayya YS; Chourasiya G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Aug; 151(2):379-85. PubMed ID: 22232773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography.
    Kruger RL; Schueler BA
    Med Phys; 2001 Jul; 28(7):1449-54. PubMed ID: 11488578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A novel approach to mammographic breast compression: Improved standardization and reduced discomfort by controlling pressure instead of force.
    de Groot JE; Broeders MJ; Branderhorst W; den Heeten GJ; Grimbergen CA
    Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081901. PubMed ID: 23927315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Average glandular dose conversion coefficients for segmented breast voxel models.
    Zankl M; Fill U; Hoeschen C; Panzer W; Regulla D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):410-4. PubMed ID: 15933148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. TLD measurements of in vivo mammographic exposures and the calculated mean glandular dose across the United States.
    Gentry JR; DeWerd LA
    Med Phys; 1996 Jun; 23(6):899-903. PubMed ID: 8798175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Improvements of an objective model of compressed breasts undergoing mammography: Generation and characterization of breast shapes.
    Rodríguez-Ruiz A; Feng SSJ; van Zelst J; Vreemann S; Mann JR; D'Orsi CJ; Sechopoulos I
    Med Phys; 2017 Jun; 44(6):2161-2172. PubMed ID: 28244109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Development of an imaging-planning program for screen/film and computed radiography mammography for breasts with short chest wall to nipple distance.
    Dong SL; Su JL; Yeh YH; Chu TC; Lin YC; Chuang KS
    Br J Radiol; 2011 Apr; 84(1000):350-7. PubMed ID: 21123310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Scatter/primary in mammography: comprehensive results.
    Boone JM; Lindfors KK; Cooper VN; Seibert JA
    Med Phys; 2000 Oct; 27(10):2408-16. PubMed ID: 11099211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A survey on performance status of mammography machines: image quality and dosimetry studies using a standard mammography imaging phantom.
    Sharma R; Sharma SD; Mayya YS
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Jul; 150(3):325-33. PubMed ID: 22090414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Diagnostic reference levels for digital mammography in New South Wales.
    Suleiman ME; McEntee MF; Cartwright L; Diffey J; Brennan PC
    J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2017 Feb; 61(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 27714925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Automated assessment of the composition of breast tissue revealed on tissue-thickness-corrected mammography.
    Wang XH; Good WF; Chapman BE; Chang YH; Poller WR; Chang TS; Hardesty LA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Jan; 180(1):257-62. PubMed ID: 12490516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cone-beam CT for breast imaging: Radiation dose, breast coverage, and image quality.
    O'Connell A; Conover DL; Zhang Y; Seifert P; Logan-Young W; Lin CF; Sahler L; Ning R
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Aug; 195(2):496-509. PubMed ID: 20651210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of fixed and variable kVp technique protocols for film-screen mammography.
    McParland BJ; Boyd MM
    Br J Radiol; 2000 Jun; 73(870):613-26. PubMed ID: 10911785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.