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 *

68 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26007201)

  • 21. Quantitative rotating multisegment slant-hole SPECT mammography with attenuation and collimator-detector response compensation.
    Xu J; Liu C; Wang Y; Frey EC; Tsui BM
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2007 Jul; 26(7):906-16. PubMed ID: 17649904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of a novel method of noise reduction using computer-simulated mammograms.
    Tischenko O; Hoeschen C; Dance DR; Hunt RA; Maidment AD; Bakic PR
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):81-4. PubMed ID: 15933085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Detection of emboli in vessels using electrical impedance measurements--phantom and electrodes.
    Nebuya S; Noshiro M; Brown BH; Smallwood RH; Milnes P
    Physiol Meas; 2005 Apr; 26(2):S111-8. PubMed ID: 15798224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Experimental justification for using 3D conductivity reconstructions in electrical impedance tomography.
    Halter RJ; Hartov A; Paulsen KD
    Physiol Meas; 2007 Jul; 28(7):S115-27. PubMed ID: 17664629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Reconstruction of conductivity changes and electrode movements based on EIT temporal sequences.
    Dai T; Gómez-Laberge C; Adler A
    Physiol Meas; 2008 Jun; 29(6):S77-88. PubMed ID: 18544802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Dual-frequency electrical impedance mammography for the diagnosis of non-malignant breast disease.
    Trokhanova OV; Okhapkin MB; Korjenevsky AV
    Physiol Meas; 2008 Jun; 29(6):S331-44. PubMed ID: 18544828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Shape deformation in two-dimensional electrical impedance tomography.
    Boyle A; Adler A; Lionheart WR
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2012 Dec; 31(12):2185-93. PubMed ID: 22711769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A phantom using titanium and Landolt rings for image quality evaluation in mammography.
    de las Heras H; Schöfer F; Tiller B; Chevalier M; Zwettler G; Semturs F
    Phys Med Biol; 2013 Apr; 58(8):L17-30. PubMed ID: 23528479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Impedance mammograph 3D phantom studies.
    Wtorek J; Stelter J; Nowakowski A
    Ann N Y Acad Sci; 1999 Apr; 873():520-33. PubMed ID: 10372188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Dose sensitivity of three phantoms used for quality assurance in digital mammography.
    Figl M; Semturs F; Kaar M; Hoffmann R; Kaldarar H; Homolka P; Mostbeck G; Scholz B; Hummel J
    Phys Med Biol; 2013 Jan; 58(2):N13-23. PubMed ID: 23257608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Experiences with phantom measurements in different mammographic systems].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Lell M; Kuchar I; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2002 Oct; 174(10):1243-6. PubMed ID: 12375196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Split electrodes for electrical-conductivity-based tissue discrimination.
    Yilmaz G; Braun F; Adler A; De Sousa AM; Ferrario D; Lemay M; Chetelat O
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2022 Jul; 2022():1266-1269. PubMed ID: 36085975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. An electrical impedance tomography system for gynecological application GIT with a tiny electrode array.
    V A C; Y V G; A V K; S A S; T S T
    Physiol Meas; 2012 May; 33(5):849-62. PubMed ID: 22531280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The impact of electrode area, contact impedance and boundary shape on EIT images.
    Boyle A; Adler A
    Physiol Meas; 2011 Jul; 32(7):745-54. PubMed ID: 21646710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Evaluation of anomaly detection algorithm using trans-admittance mammography with 60 × 60 electrode array.
    Zhao M; Wi H; Oh TI; Woo EJ
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2013; 2013():6433-6. PubMed ID: 24111214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Objective assessment of phantom image quality in mammography: a feasibility study.
    Castellano Smith AD; Castellano Smith IA; Dance DR
    Br J Radiol; 1998 Jan; 71(841):48-58. PubMed ID: 9534699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Investigation of voltage source design's for Electrical Impedance Mammography (EIM) Systems.
    Qureshi TR; Chatwin CR; Zhou Z; Li N; Wang W
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2012; 2012():1582-5. PubMed ID: 23366207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Distinguishability of inhomogeneities using planar electrode arrays and different patterns of applied excitation.
    Kao TJ; Newell JC; Saulnier GJ; Isaacson D
    Physiol Meas; 2003 May; 24(2):403-11. PubMed ID: 12812425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Comparisons of three alternative breast modalities in a common phantom imaging experiment.
    Li D; Meaney PM; Tosteson TD; Jiang S; Kerner TE; McBride TO; Pogue BW; Hartov A; Paulsen KD
    Med Phys; 2003 Aug; 30(8):2194-205. PubMed ID: 12945985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.