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 *

169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22740646)

  • 21. Mammography Dose Survey Using International Quality Standards.
    Boujemaa S; Bosmans H; Bentayeb F
    J Med Imaging Radiat Sci; 2019 Dec; 50(4):529-535. PubMed ID: 31420271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Contrast-to-noise ratio in magnification mammography: a Monte Carlo study.
    Koutalonis M; Delis H; Spyrou G; Costaridou L; Tzanakos G; Panayiotakis G
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Jun; 52(11):3185-99. PubMed ID: 17505097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. New diagnostic reference level for full-field digital mammography units.
    Hauge IH; Bredholt K; Olerud HM
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Dec; 157(2):181-92. PubMed ID: 23771960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Radiation doses received in the UK Breast Screening Programme in 1997 and 1998.
    Young KC; Burch A
    Br J Radiol; 2000 Mar; 73(867):278-87. PubMed ID: 10817044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Managing patient dose in digital radiology. A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
    International Commission on Radiological Protection
    Ann ICRP; 2004; 34(1):1-73. PubMed ID: 15302167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Image quality and dose in mammography in 17 countries in Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe: results from IAEA projects.
    Ciraj-Bjelac O; Avramova-Cholakova S; Beganovic A; Economides S; Faj D; Gershan V; Grupetta E; Kharita MH; Milakovic M; Milu C; Muhogora WE; Muthuvelu P; Oola S; Setayeshi S; Schandorf C; Ursulean I; Videnovic IR; Zaman A; Ziliukas J; Rehani MM
    Eur J Radiol; 2012 Sep; 81(9):2161-8. PubMed ID: 21665395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Evaluation of equipment performance, patient dose, imaging quality, and diagnostic coincidence in five Mexico City mammography services.
    Brandan ME; Ruiz-Trejo C; Verdejo-Silva M; Guevara M; Lozano-Zalce H; Madero-Preciado L; Martín J; Noel-Etienne LM; Ramírez-Arias JL; Soto J; Villaseñor Y
    Arch Med Res; 2004; 35(1):24-30. PubMed ID: 15036796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Application of European protocol in the evaluation of contrast-to-noise ratio and mean glandular dose for two digital mammography systems.
    Muhogora WE; Devetti A; Padovani R; Msaki P; Bonutti F
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):231-6. PubMed ID: 18283065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Radiation doses received in the UK Breast Screening Programme in 2001 and 2002.
    Young KC; Burch A; Oduko JM
    Br J Radiol; 2005 Mar; 78(927):207-18. PubMed ID: 15730985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Full-field digital mammography compared with screen-film mammography in the detection of breast cancer: rays of light through DMIST or more fog?
    Tice JA; Feldman MD
    Breast Cancer Res Treat; 2008 Jan; 107(2):157-65. PubMed ID: 17377840
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Dose and image quality in mammography with an automatic beam quality system.
    Young KC; Ramsdale ML; Rust A
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Jun; 69(822):555-62. PubMed ID: 8757659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Latin American dose survey results in mammography studies under IAEA programme: radiological protection of patients in medical exposures (TSA3).
    Mora P; Blanco S; Khoury H; Leyton F; Cárdenas J; Defaz MY; Garay F; Telón F; Aguilar JG; Roas N; Gamarra M; Blanco D; Quintero AR; Nader A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Mar; 163(4):473-9. PubMed ID: 24993012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. Clinical evaluation of a new set of image quality criteria for mammography.
    Grahn A; Hemdal B; Andersson I; Ruschin M; Thilander-Klang A; Börjesson S; Tingberg A; Mattsson S; Håkansson M; Båth M; Månsson LG; Medin J; Wanninger F; Panzer W
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):389-94. PubMed ID: 15933143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. A high-resolution voxel phantom of the breast for dose calculations in mammography.
    Hoeschen C; Fill U; Zankl M; Panzer W; Regulla D; Döhring W
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):406-9. PubMed ID: 15933147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Performance of mammography equipment in the Macedonian breast screening campaign 2008/2009.
    Gershan V; Antevska-Grujoska S
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):187-91. PubMed ID: 21733866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Guideline for the additional test positions according to the EPQC 4th Edition for Digital Mammography Systems].
    Sommer A; Lenzen H; Blaser D; Ehlers SE; Schopphoven S; John C;
    Rofo; 2009 Sep; 181(9):845-50. PubMed ID: 19676011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.