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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25892949)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Dose reduction in automatic optimization parameter of full field digital mammography: breast phantom study.
    Ko MS; Kim HH; Cha JH; Shin HJ; Kim JH; Kim MJ
    J Breast Cancer; 2013 Mar; 16(1):90-6. PubMed ID: 23593088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Estimates of Average Glandular Dose with Auto-modes of X-ray Exposures in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.
    Kamal I; Chelliah KK; Mustafa N
    Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J; 2015 May; 15(2):e292-6. PubMed ID: 26052465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Experimental investigation of the dose and image quality characteristics of a digital mammography imaging system.
    Huda W; Sajewicz AM; Ogden KM; Dance DR
    Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):442-8. PubMed ID: 12674245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Optimization of x-ray spectra in digital mammography through Monte Carlo simulations.
    Cunha DM; Tomal A; Poletti ME
    Phys Med Biol; 2012 Apr; 57(7):1919-35. PubMed ID: 22421418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. A search for optimal x-ray spectra in iodine contrast media mammography.
    Ullman G; Sandborg M; Dance DR; Yaffe M; Alm Carlsson G
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Jul; 50(13):3143-52. PubMed ID: 15972986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 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. [Experimental investigations for dose reduction by optimizing the radiation quality for digital mammography with an a-Se detector].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Hermann KP; Wenkel E; Böhner C; Lell M; Dassel MS; Bautz WA
    Rofo; 2007 May; 179(5):487-91. PubMed ID: 17436182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Optimization of tube potential-filter combinations for film-screen mammography: a contrast detail phantom study.
    Chida K; Zuguchi M; Sai M; Saito H; Yamada T; Ishibashi T; Ito D; Kimoto N; Kohzuki M; Takahashi S
    Clin Imaging; 2005; 29(4):246-50. PubMed ID: 15967314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Investigation of Exposure Factors for Various Breast Composition and Thicknesses in Digital Screening Mammography Related to Breast Dose.
    Alkhalifah K; Brindhaban A
    Med Princ Pract; 2018; 27(3):211-216. PubMed ID: 29514152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Monte Carlo generated conversion factors for the estimation of average glandular dose in contact and magnification mammography.
    Koutalonis M; Delis H; Spyrou G; Costaridou L; Tzanakos G; Panayiotakis G
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Nov; 51(21):5539-48. PubMed ID: 17047268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Manual or auto-mode: Does this affect radiation dose in digital mammography without compromising image quality?
    Patidar D; Yap LBC; Begum H; Soh BP
    Radiography (Lond); 2022 Nov; 28(4):1064-1070. PubMed ID: 35994975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Monochromatic mammography using scanning multilayer X-ray mirrors.
    Windt DL
    Rev Sci Instrum; 2018 Aug; 89(8):083702. PubMed ID: 30184654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Influence of anode-filter combinations on image quality and radiation dose in 965 women undergoing mammography.
    Thilander-Klang AC; Ackerholm PH; Berlin IC; Bjurstam NG; Mattsson SL; Månsson LG; von Schéele C; Thunberg SJ
    Radiology; 1997 May; 203(2):348-54. PubMed ID: 9114087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.