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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23756795)

  • 1. A critical comparison of three full field digital mammography systems using figure of merit.
    Kanaga KC; Yap HH; Laila SE; Sulaiman T; Zaharah M; Shantini AA
    Med J Malaysia; 2010 Jun; 65(2):119-22. PubMed ID: 23756795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Optimization of exposure parameters in full field digital mammography.
    Williams MB; Raghunathan P; More MJ; Seibert JA; Kwan A; Lo JY; Samei E; Ranger NT; Fajardo LL; McGruder A; McGruder SM; Maidment AD; Yaffe MJ; Bloomquist A; Mawdsley GE
    Med Phys; 2008 Jun; 35(6):2414-23. PubMed ID: 18649474
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Determination of Tube Output (kVp) and Exposure Mode for Breast Phantom of Various Thicknesses/Glandularity for Digital Mammography.
    Izdihar K; Kanaga KC; Krishnapillai V; Sulaiman T
    Malays J Med Sci; 2015; 22(1):40-9. PubMed ID: 25892949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Using aluminum for scatter control in mammography: preliminary work using measurements of CNR and FOM.
    Al Khalifah K; Davidson R; Zhou A
    Radiol Phys Technol; 2020 Mar; 13(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 31749130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 'In vivo' average glandular dose evaluation: one-to-one comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography.
    Cavagnetto F; Taccini G; Rosasco R; Bampi R; Calabrese M; Tagliafico A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Nov; 157(1):53-61. PubMed ID: 23734057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of radiation doses between diagnostic full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): a clinical study.
    Asbeutah AM; AlMajran AA; Brindhaban A; Asbeutah SA
    J Med Radiat Sci; 2020 Sep; 67(3):185-192. PubMed ID: 32495513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimization of the exposure parameters in digital mammography using contrast-detail metrics.
    Rojas LJ; Fausto AMF; Mol AW; Velasco FG; Abreu POS; Henriques G; Furquim TAC
    Phys Med; 2017 Oct; 42():13-18. PubMed ID: 29173906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Breast Radiation Dose With CESM Compared With 2D FFDM and 3D Tomosynthesis Mammography.
    James JR; Pavlicek W; Hanson JA; Boltz TF; Patel BK
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Feb; 208(2):362-372. PubMed ID: 28112559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Patient dose in digital mammography.
    Chevalier M; Morán P; Ten JI; Fernández Soto JM; Cepeda T; Vañó E
    Med Phys; 2004 Sep; 31(9):2471-9. PubMed ID: 15487727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Optimization of the exposure parameters in digital mammography for diverse glandularities using the contrast-detail metric.
    Martí Villarreal OA; Velasco FG; Fausto AMF; Milian FM; Mol AW; Capizzi KR; Ambrosio P
    Phys Med; 2022 Sep; 101():112-119. PubMed ID: 35988481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Radiation exposure of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography compared with full-field digital mammography.
    Jeukens CR; Lalji UC; Meijer E; Bakija B; Theunissen R; Wildberger JE; Lobbes MB
    Invest Radiol; 2014 Oct; 49(10):659-65. PubMed ID: 24872005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of full field digital (FFD) and computed radiography (CR) mammography systems in Greece.
    Kalathaki M; Hourdakis CJ; Economides S; Tritakis P; Kalyvas N; Simantirakis G; Manousaridis G; Kaisas I; Kamenopoulou V
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):202-5. PubMed ID: 21821614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Impact on dose and image quality of a software-based scatter correction in mammography.
    Monserrat T; Prieto E; Barbés B; Pina L; Elizalde A; Fernández B
    Acta Radiol; 2018 Jun; 59(6):649-656. PubMed ID: 28870087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose.
    Berns EA; Hendrick RE; Cutter GR
    Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):334-40. PubMed ID: 12674233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Radiation exposure of digital breast tomosynthesis using an antiscatter grid compared with full-field digital mammography.
    Paulis LE; Lobbes MB; Lalji UC; Gelissen N; Bouwman RW; Wildberger JE; Jeukens CR
    Invest Radiol; 2015 Oct; 50(10):679-85. PubMed ID: 26011823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Optimization of Image Quality and Dose in Digital Mammography.
    Fausto AM; Lopes MC; de Sousa MC; Furquim TA; Mol AW; Velasco FG
    J Digit Imaging; 2017 Apr; 30(2):185-196. PubMed ID: 27896452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison between Recorded and Measured Radiation Doses in Diagnostic Full-field Digital Mammography: A Phantom Study.
    Asbeutah AM; Brindhaban A
    J Clin Imaging Sci; 2020; 10():73. PubMed ID: 33274117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Physical characteristics of five clinical systems for digital mammography.
    Lazzari B; Belli G; Gori C; Rosselli Del Turco M
    Med Phys; 2007 Jul; 34(7):2730-43. PubMed ID: 17821981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluation of clinical full field digital mammography with the task specific system-model-based Fourier Hotelling observer (SMFHO) SNR.
    Liu H; Chakrabarti K; Kaczmarek RV; Benevides L; Gu S; Kyprianou IS
    Med Phys; 2014 May; 41(5):051907. PubMed ID: 24784386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.