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 *

201 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26103172)

  • 1. CT image quality over time: comparison of image quality for six different CT scanners over a six-year period.
    Roa AM; Andersen HK; Martinsen AC
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Mar; 16(2):4972. PubMed ID: 26103172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Interphantom and interscanner variations for Hounsfield units--establishment of reference values for HU in a commercial QA phantom.
    Sande EP; Martinsen AC; Hole EO; Olerud HM
    Phys Med Biol; 2010 Sep; 55(17):5123-35. PubMed ID: 20714048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Quantitation of clinical feedback on image quality differences between two CT scanner models.
    Bache ST; Stauduhar PJ; Liu X; Loyer EM; John RX
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 18(2):163-169. PubMed ID: 28300384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Quantification and homogenization of image noise between two CT scanner models.
    Einstein SA; Rong XJ; Jensen CT; Liu X
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2020 Jan; 21(1):174-178. PubMed ID: 31859454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Performance evaluation of an 85-cm-bore X-ray computed tomography scanner designed for radiation oncology and comparison with current diagnostic CT scanners.
    Garcia-Ramirez JL; Mutic S; Dempsey JF; Low DA; Purdy JA
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2002 Mar; 52(4):1123-31. PubMed ID: 11958910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quality control of CT systems by automated monitoring of key performance indicators: a two-year study.
    Nowik P; Bujila R; Poludniowski G; Fransson A
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 16(4):254–265. PubMed ID: 26219012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A routine quality assurance test for CT automatic exposure control systems.
    Iball GR; Moore AC; Crawford EJ
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 Jul; 17(4):291-306. PubMed ID: 27455490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Practical experiences in the transfer of clinical protocols between CT scanners with different ATCM systems.
    Sookpeng S; Martin CJ; Cheebsumon P; Pengpan T
    J Radiol Prot; 2017 Mar; 37(1):84-96. PubMed ID: 27977415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessment of longitudinal beam property and contrast uniformity for 256- and 320-row area detector computed tomography scanners in the 160-mm nonhelical volume-acquisition mode.
    Hara T; Niwa S; Urikura A; Matsubara K; Hoshino T; Nishimaru E; Taniguchi T
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Aug; 20(8):164-170. PubMed ID: 31254457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Technical Note: Proof of concept for radiomics-based quality assurance for computed tomography.
    Branco LRF; Ger RB; Mackin DS; Zhou S; Court LE; Layman RR
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Nov; 20(11):199-205. PubMed ID: 31609076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 100 days with scans of the same Catphan phantom on the same CT scanner.
    Husby E; Svendsen ED; Andersen HK; Martinsen ACT
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Nov; 18(6):224-231. PubMed ID: 28921910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. How to measure CT image quality: variations in CT-numbers, uniformity and low contrast resolution for a CT quality assurance phantom.
    Gulliksrud K; Stokke C; Martinsen AC
    Phys Med; 2014 Jun; 30(4):521-6. PubMed ID: 24530005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Investigation of the influence of image reconstruction filter and scan parameters on operation of automatic tube current modulation systems for different CT scanners.
    Sookpeng S; Martin CJ; Gentle DJ
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Mar; 163(4):521-30. PubMed ID: 25107439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. CT radiation dose and image quality.
    Payne JT
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2005 Nov; 43(6):953-62, vii. PubMed ID: 16253656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessment of Image Quality and Dosimetric Performance of CT Simulators.
    Rezaee M; Letourneau D
    J Med Imaging Radiat Sci; 2019 Jun; 50(2):297-307. PubMed ID: 31176438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparative study based on image quality and clinical task performance for CT reconstruction algorithms in radiotherapy.
    Li H; Dolly S; Chen HC; Anastasio MA; Low DA; Li HH; Michalski JM; Thorstad WL; Gay H; Mutic S
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 Jul; 17(4):377-390. PubMed ID: 27455472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparative evaluation of image quality from three CT simulation scanners.
    McCann C; Alasti H
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2004; 5(4):55-70. PubMed ID: 15738921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effect of mA Reduction on Image Quality Parameters and Patient Dose in Computed Tomography Imaging.
    Saeed RS; Brindhaban A; Al Khalifah KH; Al Enezi OJ
    Radiol Technol; 2016; 87(3):271-8. PubMed ID: 26721839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Incorporating multislice imaging into x-ray CT polymer gel dosimetry.
    Johnston H; Hilts M; Jirasek A
    Med Phys; 2015 Apr; 42(4):1666-77. PubMed ID: 25832056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Optimization of SPECT-CT Hybrid Imaging Using Iterative Image Reconstruction for Low-Dose CT: A Phantom Study.
    Grosser OS; Kupitz D; Ruf J; Czuczwara D; Steffen IG; Furth C; Thormann M; Loewenthal D; Ricke J; Amthauer H
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(9):e0138658. PubMed ID: 26390216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.