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: 22088977)

  • 21. Mismatch in breast and detector size during screening and diagnostic mammography results in increased patient radiation dose.
    Wells CL; Slanetz PJ; Rosen MP
    Acad Radiol; 2014 Jan; 21(1):99-103. PubMed ID: 24331271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Evaluation of patient dose for mammography in Pernambuco, Brazil.
    Khoury HJ; Barros VS; Lopes C
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 115(1-4):337-9. PubMed ID: 16381742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. Comparison of image quality indicators among mammography facilities in Ontario.
    Ford NL; Yaffe MJ
    Can Assoc Radiol J; 2001 Dec; 52(6):369-72. PubMed ID: 11780545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of anode/filter combinations in digital mammography with respect to the average glandular dose.
    Uhlenbrock DF; Mertelmeier T
    Rofo; 2009 Mar; 181(3):249-54. PubMed ID: 19241602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Quality assurance in screening mammography.
    Health Devices; 1990; 19(5-6):152-98. PubMed ID: 2372321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Radiation doses due to breast imaging in Manitoba: 1978-1988.
    Huda W; Sourkes AM; Bews JA; Kowaluk R
    Radiology; 1990 Dec; 177(3):813-6. PubMed ID: 2243994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Radiation exposure in x-ray mammography].
    Säbel M; Aichinger U; Schulz-Wendtland R
    Rofo; 2001 Feb; 173(2):79-91. PubMed ID: 11253092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Female breast surface radiation exposure during FDG PET/CT examinations.
    Halac M; Yilmaz MH; Sonmezoglu K; Sager S; Ozer H; Yasar D; Demir B; Kanmaz B; Uslu I
    Nucl Med Commun; 2007 Dec; 28(12):924-8. PubMed ID: 18090219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comprehensive dose survey of breast screening in Ireland.
    Baldelli P; McCullagh J; Phelan N; Flanagan F
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Apr; 145(1):52-60. PubMed ID: 21097483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Mean glandular doses in mammography: a comparison of values displayed by a mammography unit with in-house values, both using the method proposed by Dance.
    Pasicz K; Fabiszewska E; Grabska I; Skrzyński W
    J Radiol Prot; 2016 Sep; 36(3):709-715. PubMed ID: 27556917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Normalized average glandular dose in magnification mammography.
    Liu B; Goodsitt M; Chan HP
    Radiology; 1995 Oct; 197(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 7568836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Computer-based collection of mammographic exposure data for quality assurance and dosimetry.
    Rosenberg RD; Kelsey CA; Williamson MR; Houston JD; Hunt WC
    Med Phys; 2001 Aug; 28(8):1546-51. PubMed ID: 11548925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Survey of doses in screening mammography.
    Heggie JC
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1996 Dec; 19(4):207-16. PubMed ID: 9060207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Measurement of the radiation dose and assessment of the risk in mammography screening for early detection of cancer of the breast, in Israel.
    Broisman A; Schlesinger T; Alfassi ZB
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Jan; 143(1):113-6. PubMed ID: 21068021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. A pilot survey of radiation doses received in the United Kingdom Breast Screening Programme.
    Burch A; Goodman DA
    Br J Radiol; 1998 May; 71(845):517-27. PubMed ID: 9691897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Comparison of results from quality control of physical parameters and results from clinical evaluation of mammographic images for the mammography screening facilities in Poland.
    Fabiszewska E; Grabska I; Jankowska K; Wesolowska E; Bulski W
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):206-9. PubMed ID: 21824870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Image quality of mammography in Croatian nationwide screening program: comparison between various types of facilities.
    Brnić Z; Blašković D; Klasić B; Ramač JP; Flegarić-Bradić M; Stimac D; Lubina IZ; Brnić V; Faj D
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Apr; 81(4):e478-85. PubMed ID: 21715115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.