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 *

154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21481555)

  • 1. A comparison between the electronic magnification (EM) and true magnification (TM) of breast phantom images using a CDMAM phantom.
    Vahey K; Ryan E; McLean D; Poulos A; Rickard M
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Jul; 81(7):1514-9. PubMed ID: 21481555
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Image quality and radiation exposure in digital mammography with storage phosphor screens in a magnification technic].
    Fiedler E; Aichinger U; Böhner C; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Bautz W
    Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):60-4. PubMed ID: 10464507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Comparison between image quality in electronic zoom and geometric magnification in digital mammography.
    Alkhalifah KH; Brindhaban A; Asbeutah AM
    J Xray Sci Technol; 2016 Oct; 24(5):681-689. PubMed ID: 27341625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Magnification mammography: a comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for the detection of simulated small masses and microcalcifications.
    Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Funke M; Grabbe EH
    Eur Radiol; 2002 Sep; 12(9):2188-91. PubMed ID: 12195468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD).
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Wenkel E; Bautz W
    Rontgenpraxis; 2001; 54(4):123-6. PubMed ID: 11883115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Storage phosphor direct magnification mammography in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography--a phantom study.
    Funke M; Breiter N; Hermann KP; Oestmann JW; Grabbe E
    Br J Radiol; 1998 May; 71(845):528-34. PubMed ID: 9691898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Short communication: anomalous image quality phantom scores in magnification mammography: evidence of phase contrast enhancement.
    Kotre CJ; Birch IP; Robson KJ
    Br J Radiol; 2002 Feb; 75(890):170-3. PubMed ID: 11893641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of digital and screen-film mammography using quality control phantoms.
    Undrill PE; O'Kane AD; Gilbert FJ
    Clin Radiol; 2000 Oct; 55(10):782-90. PubMed ID: 11052880
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [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]  

  • 11. [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]  

  • 12. [Digital storage phosphor mammography in a magnification technic: experimental studies for spatial resolution and for detection of microcalcifications].
    Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Hundertmark C; Sachs J; Gruhl T; Sperner W; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1997 Aug; 167(2):174-9. PubMed ID: 9333359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. The effects of stereo shift angle, geometric magnification and display zoom on depth measurements in digital stereomammography.
    Goodsitt MM; Chan HP; Darner KL; Hadjiiski LM
    Med Phys; 2002 Nov; 29(11):2725-34. PubMed ID: 12462741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of image quality on calcification detection in digital mammography.
    Warren LM; Mackenzie A; Cooke J; Given-Wilson RM; Wallis MG; Chakraborty DP; Dance DR; Bosmans H; Young KC
    Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6):3202-13. PubMed ID: 22755704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Direct radiological magnification of thin objects compared with contact exposures and mammographic techniques (author's transl)].
    Franken T
    Rofo; 1982 Apr; 136(4):453-62. PubMed ID: 6212485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Contrast-detail phantom scoring methodology.
    Thomas JA; Chakrabarti K; Kaczmarek R; Romanyukha A
    Med Phys; 2005 Mar; 32(3):807-14. PubMed ID: 15839353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Dose reduction in full-field digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study.
    Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Grabbe E
    Br J Radiol; 2003 Jul; 76(907):478-82. PubMed ID: 12857708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Objective assessment of image quality in conventional and digital mammography taking into account dynamic range.
    Pachoud M; Lepori D; Valley JF; Verdun FR
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):380-2. PubMed ID: 15933141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Direct digital magnification mammography with a large-surface detector made of amorphous silicon].
    Hermann KP; Hundertmark C; Funke M; von Brenndorff A; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1999 May; 170(5):503-6. PubMed ID: 10370416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.