161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21973375)
1. Temperature dependent ultrasonic characterization of biological media.
Ghoshal G; Luchies AC; Blue JP; Oelze ML
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2203-11. PubMed ID: 21973375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Ex vivo study of quantitative ultrasound parameters in fatty rabbit livers.
Ghoshal G; Lavarello RJ; Kemmerer JP; Miller RJ; Oelze ML
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2012 Dec; 38(12):2238-48. PubMed ID: 23062376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The acoustic properties, centered on 20 MHZ, of an IEC agar-based tissue-mimicking material and its temperature, frequency and age dependence.
Brewin MP; Pike LC; Rowland DE; Birch MJ
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2008 Aug; 34(8):1292-306. PubMed ID: 18343021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Quantitative Ultrasound for Monitoring High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Treatment In Vivo.
Ghoshal G; Kemmerer JP; Karunakaran C; Miller RJ; Oelze ML
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2016 Sep; 63(9):1234-42. PubMed ID: 26780790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quantitative ultrasonic characterization of diffuse scatterers in the presence of structures that produce coherent echoes.
Luchies AC; Ghoshal G; O'Brien WD; Oelze ML
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2012 May; 59(5):893-904. PubMed ID: 22622974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. In Vivo Validation of an In Situ Calibration Bead as a Reference for Backscatter Coefficient Calculation.
Zhao Y; Czarnota GJ; Park TH; Miller RJ; Oelze ML
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2024 Jun; 50(6):833-842. PubMed ID: 38471999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Improved diagnostics through quantitative ultrasound imaging.
Hruska DP; Sanchez J; Oelze ML
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2009; 2009():1956-9. PubMed ID: 19964021
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Quantitative ultrasound imaging for monitoring in situ high-intensity focused ultrasound exposure.
Ghoshal G; Kemmerer JP; Karunakaran C; Abuhabsah R; Miller RJ; Sarwate S; Oelze ML
Ultrason Imaging; 2014 Oct; 36(4):239-55. PubMed ID: 24970857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Effective scatterer diameter estimates for broad scatterer size distributions.
Nordberg EP; Hall TJ
Ultrason Imaging; 2015 Jan; 37(1):3-21. PubMed ID: 24831300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Ultrasound assessment of the conversion of sound energy into heat in tissue phantoms enriched with magnetic micro- and nanoparticles.
Gambin B; Kruglenko E; Tymkiewicz R; Litniewski J
Med Phys; 2019 Oct; 46(10):4361-4370. PubMed ID: 31359439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cross-imaging system comparison of backscatter coefficient estimates from a tissue-mimicking material.
Nam K; Rosado-Mendez IM; Wirtzfeld LA; Kumar V; Madsen EL; Ghoshal G; Pawlicki AD; Oelze ML; Lavarello RJ; Bigelow TA; Zagzebski JA; O'Brien WD; Hall TJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1319-24. PubMed ID: 22978860
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Experimental assessment of four ultrasound scattering models for characterizing concentrated tissue-mimicking phantoms.
Franceschini E; Guillermin R
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):3735-47. PubMed ID: 23231104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Quantitative ultrasound estimates from populations of scatterers with continuous size distributions.
Lavarello R; Oelze M
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2011 Apr; 58(4):744-53. PubMed ID: 21507752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Ultrasonic backscatter coefficient quantitative estimates from Chinese hamster ovary cell pellet biophantoms.
Teisseire M; Han A; Abuhabsah R; Blue JP; Sarwate S; O'Brien WD
J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Nov; 128(5):3175-80. PubMed ID: 21110612
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of ultrasonic scattering in agar-based phantoms using 3D printed scattering molds.
Filippou A; Damianou C
J Ultrasound; 2022 Sep; 25(3):597-609. PubMed ID: 34997563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Trade-offs in data acquisition and processing parameters for backscatter and scatterer size estimations.
Liu W; Zagzebski JA
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2010; 57(2):340-52. PubMed ID: 20178900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Scattering by single physically large and weak scatterers in the beam of a single-element transducer.
Kemmerer JP; Oelze ML; Gyöngy M
J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Mar; 137(3):1153-63. PubMed ID: 25786931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Ultrasonic backscatter coefficients for weakly scattering, agar spheres in agar phantoms.
King MR; Anderson JJ; Herd MT; Ma D; Haak A; Wirtzfeld LA; Madsen EL; Zagzebski JA; Oelze ML; Hall TJ; O'Brien WD
J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Aug; 128(2):903-8. PubMed ID: 20707460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Interlaboratory comparison of backscatter coefficient estimates for tissue-mimicking phantoms.
Anderson JJ; Herd MT; King MR; Haak A; Hafez ZT; Song J; Oelze ML; Madsen EL; Zagzebski JA; O'Brien WD; Hall TJ
Ultrason Imaging; 2010 Jan; 32(1):48-64. PubMed ID: 20690431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Theoretical and phantom based investigation of the impact of sound speed and backscatter variations on attenuation slope estimation.
Omari E; Lee H; Varghese T
Ultrasonics; 2011 Aug; 51(6):758-67. PubMed ID: 21477832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
