BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23689308)

  • 1. Technical and clinical breast cancer screening performance indicators for computed radiography versus direct digital radiography.
    Bosmans H; De Hauwere A; Lemmens K; Zanca F; Thierens H; Van Ongeval C; Van Herck K; Van Steen A; Martens P; Bleyen L; Vande Putte G; Kellen E; Mortier G; Van Limbergen E
    Eur Radiol; 2013 Oct; 23(10):2891-8. PubMed ID: 23689308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Impact of the digitalisation of mammography on performance parameters and breast dose in the Flemish Breast Cancer Screening Programme.
    Timmermans L; De Hauwere A; Bacher K; Bosmans H; Lemmens K; Bleyen L; Van Limbergen E; Martens P; Van Steen A; Mortier G; Van Herck K; Thierens H
    Eur Radiol; 2014 Aug; 24(8):1808-19. PubMed ID: 24816932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Digital mammography screening: average glandular dose and first performance parameters.
    Weigel S; Girnus R; Czwoydzinski J; Decker T; Spital S; Heindel W
    Rofo; 2007 Sep; 179(9):892-5. PubMed ID: 17705112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Digital mammography screening with photon-counting technique: can a high diagnostic performance be realized at low mean glandular dose?
    Weigel S; Berkemeyer S; Girnus R; Sommer A; Lenzen H; Heindel W
    Radiology; 2014 May; 271(2):345-55. PubMed ID: 24495234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Radiation doses received in the United Kingdom breast screening programme in 2010 to 2012.
    Young KC; Oduko JM
    Br J Radiol; 2016; 89(1058):20150831. PubMed ID: 26654386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Digital compared with screen-film mammography: performance measures in concurrent cohorts within an organized breast screening program.
    Chiarelli AM; Edwards SA; Prummel MV; Muradali D; Majpruz V; Done SJ; Brown P; Shumak RS; Yaffe MJ
    Radiology; 2013 Sep; 268(3):684-93. PubMed ID: 23674784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Detection Rate, Recall Rate, and Positive Predictive Value of Digital Compared to Screen-Film Mammography in the Quebec Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening Program.
    Théberge I; Vandal N; Langlois A; Pelletier É; Brisson J
    Can Assoc Radiol J; 2016 Nov; 67(4):330-338. PubMed ID: 27451910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Digital versus screen-film mammography: a retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program.
    Heddson B; Rönnow K; Olsson M; Miller D
    Eur J Radiol; 2007 Dec; 64(3):419-25. PubMed ID: 17383841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Digital Compared with Screen-Film Mammography: Measures of Diagnostic Accuracy among Women Screened in the Ontario Breast Screening Program.
    Prummel MV; Muradali D; Shumak R; Majpruz V; Brown P; Jiang H; Done SJ; Yaffe MJ; Chiarelli AM
    Radiology; 2016 Feb; 278(2):365-73. PubMed ID: 26334680
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Image quality, threshold contrast and mean glandular dose in CR mammography.
    Jakubiak RR; Gamba HR; Neves EB; Peixoto JE
    Phys Med Biol; 2013 Sep; 58(18):6565-83. PubMed ID: 24002695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Impact on the recall rate of digital breast tomosynthesis as an adjunct to digital mammography in the screening setting. A double reading experience and review of the literature.
    Carbonaro LA; Di Leo G; Clauser P; Trimboli RM; Verardi N; Fedeli MP; Girometti R; Tafà A; Bruscoli P; Saguatti G; Bazzocchi M; Sardanelli F
    Eur J Radiol; 2016 Apr; 85(4):808-14. PubMed ID: 26971428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Screening Mammography Efficacy: A Comparison Between Screen-Film, Computed Radiography and Digital Mammography in Taiwan.
    Elbakkoush AA; Atique S; Chiang IJ
    Stud Health Technol Inform; 2015; 216():914. PubMed ID: 26262216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice.
    Greenberg JS; Javitt MC; Katzen J; Michael S; Holland AE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Sep; 203(3):687-93. PubMed ID: 24918774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Patient doses from screen-film and full-field digital mammography in a population-based screening programme.
    Hauge IH; Pedersen K; Sanderud A; Hofvind S; Olerud HM
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Jan; 148(1):65-73. PubMed ID: 21335333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Low dose high energy x-ray in-line phase sensitive imaging prototype: Investigation of optimal geometric conditions and design parameters.
    Ghani MU; Yan A; Wong MD; Li Y; Ren L; Wu X; Liu H
    J Xray Sci Technol; 2015; 23(6):667-82. PubMed ID: 26756405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Breast cancer detection rates using four different types of mammography detectors.
    Mackenzie A; Warren LM; Wallis MG; Cooke J; Given-Wilson RM; Dance DR; Chakraborty DP; Halling-Brown MD; Looney PT; Young KC
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Mar; 26(3):874-83. PubMed ID: 26105023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. PORTUGUESE STUDY OF MEAN GLANDULAR DOSE IN MAMMOGRAPHY AND COMPARISON WITH EUROPEAN REFERENCES.
    Sá Dos Reis C; Fartaria MJ; Garcia Alves JH; Pascoal A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2018 Jun; 179(4):391-399. PubMed ID: 29342291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of direct digital mammography, computed radiography, and film-screen in the French national breast cancer screening program.
    Séradour B; Heid P; Estève J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Jan; 202(1):229-36. PubMed ID: 24370149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Screen-detected versus interval cancers: Effect of imaging modality and breast density in the Flemish Breast Cancer Screening Programme.
    Timmermans L; Bleyen L; Bacher K; Van Herck K; Lemmens K; Van Ongeval C; Van Steen A; Martens P; De Brabander I; Goossens M; Thierens H
    Eur Radiol; 2017 Sep; 27(9):3810-3819. PubMed ID: 28289944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.