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 *

131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23239693)

  • 1. Scatter radiation intensities around full-field digital mammography units.
    Judge MA; Keavey E; Phelan N
    Br J Radiol; 2013 Jan; 86(1021):20120130. PubMed ID: 23239693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Scatter radiation intensities around a clinical digital breast tomosynthesis unit and the impact on radiation shielding considerations.
    Yang K; Li X; Liu B
    Med Phys; 2016 Mar; 43(3):1096-110. PubMed ID: 26936697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Grid removal and impact on population dose in full-field digital mammography.
    Gennaro G; Katz L; Souchay H; Klausz R; Alberelli C; di Maggio C
    Med Phys; 2007 Feb; 34(2):547-55. PubMed ID: 17388172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Radiation shielding calculation for digital breast tomosynthesis rooms with an updated workload survey.
    Yang K; Schultz TJ; Li X; Liu B
    J Radiol Prot; 2017 Mar; 37(1):230-246. PubMed ID: 28141582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Are phantoms useful for predicting the potential of dose reduction in full-field digital mammography?
    Gennaro G; Katz L; Souchay H; Alberelli C; di Maggio C
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Apr; 50(8):1851-70. PubMed ID: 15815100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Influence of scatter reduction method and monochromatic beams on image quality and dose in mammography.
    Moeckli R; Verdun FR; Fiedler S; Pachoud M; Bulling S; Schnyder P; Valley JF
    Med Phys; 2003 Dec; 30(12):3156-64. PubMed ID: 14713082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Scatter rejection in multislit digital mammography.
    Aslund M; Cederström B; Lundqvist M; Danielsson M
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):933-40. PubMed ID: 16696469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Establishment of scatter factors for use in shielding calculations and risk assessment for computed tomography facilities.
    Wallace H; Martin CJ; Sutton DG; Peet D; Williams JR
    J Radiol Prot; 2012 Mar; 32(1):39-50. PubMed ID: 22327169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Determination of shielding requirements for mammography.
    Okunade AA; Ademoroti OA
    Med Phys; 2004 May; 31(5):1210-8. PubMed ID: 15191311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a selenium flat-panel detector].
    Gosch D; Jendrass S; Scholz M; Kahn T
    Rofo; 2006 Jul; 178(7):693-7. PubMed ID: 16761214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. SCATTER RADIATION INTENSITIES IN HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL PLANES ABOUT DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS SYSTEM.
    Varcoe JG; Barnes P
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2022 Feb; 198(1-2):119-127. PubMed ID: 35137230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of scatter and an antiscatter grid on the performance of a slot-scanning digital mammography system.
    Shen SZ; Bloomquist AK; Mawdsley GE; Yaffe MJ; Elbakri I
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):1108-15. PubMed ID: 16696488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Dose reduction through gridless technique in digital full-field mammography].
    Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Berzeg S; Bick U; Fischer T; Hamm B
    Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):769-74. PubMed ID: 12811688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Physical characterization of a scanning photon counting digital mammography system based on Si-strip detectors.
    Aslund M; Cederström B; Lundqvist M; Danielsson M
    Med Phys; 2007 Jun; 34(6):1918-25. PubMed ID: 17654894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparative study of the influence of anode and filter materials on primary shielding requirements for mammography.
    Okunade AA
    Health Phys; 2005 Feb; 88(2 Suppl):S44-52. PubMed ID: 15654245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dosimetric and image quality comparison of two digital mammography units with different target/filter combinations: Mo/Mo, Mo/Rh, W/Rh, W/Ag.
    Emanuelli S; Rizzi E; Amerio S; Fasano C; Cesarani F
    Radiol Med; 2011 Mar; 116(2):310-8. PubMed ID: 21225367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The readout thickness versus the measured thickness for a range of screen film mammography and full-field digital mammography units.
    Hauge IH; Hogg P; Szczepura K; Connolly P; McGill G; Mercer C
    Med Phys; 2012 Jan; 39(1):263-71. PubMed ID: 22225296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Applicability of ACR breast dosimetry methodology to a digital mammography system.
    Tomon JJ; Johnson TE; Swenson KN; Schauer DA
    Med Phys; 2006 Mar; 33(3):799-807. PubMed ID: 16878582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. X-ray scattering in full-field digital mammography.
    Nykänen K; Siltanen S
    Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1864-73. PubMed ID: 12906205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.