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.
471 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25900891)
1. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: Glandular dose estimation using a Monte Carlo code and voxel phantom. Tzamicha E; Yakoumakis E; Tsalafoutas IA; Dimitriadis A; Georgiou E; Tsapaki V; Chalazonitis A Phys Med; 2015 Nov; 31(7):785-91. PubMed ID: 25900891 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Dual-energy contrast-enhanced digital mammography: patient radiation dose estimation using a Monte Carlo code. Yakoumakis E; Tzamicha E; Dimitriadis A; Georgiou E; Tsapaki V; Chalazonitis A Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Jul; 165(1-4):369-72. PubMed ID: 25836682 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dosimetric characterization and organ dose assessment in digital breast tomosynthesis: Measurements and Monte Carlo simulations using voxel phantoms. Baptista M; Di Maria S; Barros S; Figueira C; Sarmento M; Orvalho L; Vaz P Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3788-800. PubMed ID: 26133581 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Phantom study to evaluate contrast-medium-enhanced digital subtraction mammography with a full-field indirect-detection system. Palma BA; Rosado-Méndez I; Villaseñor Y; Brandan ME Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):577-89. PubMed ID: 20229866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Monte Carlo simulation for the estimation of the glandular breast dose for a digital breast tomosynthesis system. Rodrigues L; Magalhaes LA; Braz D Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Dec; 167(4):576-83. PubMed ID: 25480841 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Clinical digital breast tomosynthesis system: dosimetric characterization. Feng SS; Sechopoulos I Radiology; 2012 Apr; 263(1):35-42. PubMed ID: 22332070 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Dosimetric characterization of a dedicated breast computed tomography clinical prototype. Sechopoulos I; Feng SS; D'Orsi CJ Med Phys; 2010 Aug; 37(8):4110-20. PubMed ID: 20879571 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis. Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D Rofo; 2012 Oct; 184(10):911-8. PubMed ID: 22711250 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Investigating energy deposition in glandular tissues for mammography using multiscale Monte Carlo simulations. Oliver PAK; Thomson RM Med Phys; 2019 Mar; 46(3):1426-1436. PubMed ID: 30657190 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Breast dosimetry using high-resolution voxel phantoms. Dance DR; Hunt RA; Bakic PR; Maidment AD; Sandborg M; Ullman G; Alm Carlsson G Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):359-63. PubMed ID: 15933137 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Multiscale Monte Carlo simulations for dosimetry in x-ray breast imaging: Part I - Macroscopic scales. Massera RT; Tomal A; Thomson RM Med Phys; 2024 Feb; 51(2):1105-1116. PubMed ID: 38156766 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Optimal photon energy comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and mammography: a case study. Di Maria S; Baptista M; Felix M; Oliveira N; Matela N; Janeiro L; Vaz P; Orvalho L; Silva A Phys Med; 2014 Jun; 30(4):482-8. PubMed ID: 24613514 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Monte Carlo performance on the x-ray converter thickness in digital mammography using software breast models. Liaparinos P; Bliznakova K Med Phys; 2012 Nov; 39(11):6638-51. PubMed ID: 23127058 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Mammography of a phantom and breast tissue with synchrotron radiation and a linear-array silicon detector. Arfelli F; Bonvicini V; Bravin A; Cantatore G; Castelli E; Dalla Palma L; Di Michiel M; Longo R; Olivo A; Pani S; Pontoni D; Poropat P; Prest M; Rashevsky A; Tromba G; Vacchi A Radiology; 1998 Sep; 208(3):709-15. PubMed ID: 9722850 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Intra-individual comparison of average glandular dose of two digital mammography units using different anode/filter combinations. Engelken FJ; Meyer H; Juran R; Bick U; Fallenberg E; Diekmann F Acad Radiol; 2009 Oct; 16(10):1272-80. PubMed ID: 19632866 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Glandular dose indices using a glandular dose to air kerma volume histogram in mammography. Shinohara S; Araki F; Ohno T Med Phys; 2020 Mar; 47(3):1340-1348. PubMed ID: 31859402 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Thickness of molybdenum filter and squared contrast-to-noise ratio per dose for digital mammography. Nishino TK; Wu X; Johnson RF AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2005 Oct; 185(4):960-3. PubMed ID: 16177415 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Radiation doses in volume-of-interest breast computed tomography--A Monte Carlo simulation study. Lai CJ; Zhong Y; Yi Y; Wang T; Shaw CC Med Phys; 2015 Jun; 42(6):3063-75. PubMed ID: 26127058 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]