362 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26377266)
1. Radiographers' Ability to Detect Low-Contrast Detail in Digital Radiography Systems.
Alsleem H; Davidson R
Radiol Technol; 2015; 87(1):29-37. PubMed ID: 26377266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of radiographic techniques on the low-contrast detail detectability performance of digital radiography systems.
Alsleem H; U P; Mong KS; Davidson R
Radiol Technol; 2014; 85(6):614-22. PubMed ID: 25002641
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Physical image quality comparison of four types of digital detector for chest radiology.
Fernandez JM; Ordiales JM; Guibelalde E; Prieto C; Vano E
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):140-3. PubMed ID: 18283060
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Fractal-feature distance as a substitute for observer performance index in contrast-detail examination.
Imai K; Ikeda M; Enchi Y; Niimi T
Eur J Radiol; 2008 Sep; 67(3):541-5. PubMed ID: 17689214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of edge analysis techniques for the determination of the MTF of digital radiographic systems.
Samei E; Buhr E; Granfors P; Vandenbroucke D; Wang X
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Aug; 50(15):3613-25. PubMed ID: 16030386
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Exposure variability and image quality in computed radiography.
Fauber TL
Radiol Technol; 2009; 80(3):209-15. PubMed ID: 19153197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An examination of automatic exposure control regimes for two digital radiography systems.
Marshall NW
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Aug; 54(15):4645-70. PubMed ID: 19590115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Automated analysis of phantom images for the evaluation of long-term reproducibility in digital mammography.
Gennaro G; Ferro F; Contento G; Fornasin F; di Maggio C
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Mar; 52(5):1387-407. PubMed ID: 17301461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Using breast radiographers' reports as a second opinion for radiologists' readings of microcalcifications in digital mammography.
Tanaka R; Takamori M; Uchiyama Y; Nishikawa RM; Shiraishi J
Br J Radiol; 2015 Mar; 88(1047):20140565. PubMed ID: 25536443
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Toward objective and quantitative evaluation of imaging systems using images of phantoms.
Gagne RM; Gallas BD; Myers KJ
Med Phys; 2006 Jan; 33(1):83-95. PubMed ID: 16485413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Quantification of the effect of system and object parameters on edge enhancement in phase-contrast radiography.
Donnelly EF; Price RR; Pickens DR
Med Phys; 2003 Nov; 30(11):2888-96. PubMed ID: 14655935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Computed radiography: its impact on radiographers.
Cesar LJ
Radiol Technol; 1997; 68(3):225-32. PubMed ID: 9008016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Study of digital mammographic equipments by phantom image quality.
Mayo P; Rodenas F; Verdú G; Campayo JM; Villaescusa JI
Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2006; 2006():1994-6. PubMed ID: 17946081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Validation of a digital mammographic unit model for an objective and highly automated clinical image quality assessment.
Perez-Ponce H; Daul C; Wolf D; Noel A
Med Eng Phys; 2013 Aug; 35(8):1089-96; discussion 1089. PubMed ID: 23207102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Computing eye gaze metrics for the automatic assessment of radiographer performance during X-ray image interpretation.
McLaughlin L; Bond R; Hughes C; McConnell J; McFadden S
Int J Med Inform; 2017 Sep; 105():11-21. PubMed ID: 28750903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Contrast-detail phantom scoring methodology.
Thomas JA; Chakrabarti K; Kaczmarek R; Romanyukha A
Med Phys; 2005 Mar; 32(3):807-14. PubMed ID: 15839353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Fractal-feature distance analysis of contrast-detail phantom image and meaning of pseudo fractal dimension and complexity.
Imai K; Ikeda M; Enchi Y; Niimi T
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2009 Dec; 32(4):188-95. PubMed ID: 20169837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Automatic quantitative low contrast analysis of digital chest phantom radiographs.
Kwan AL; Filipow LJ; Le LH
Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):312-20. PubMed ID: 12674230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A new automated assessment method for contrast-detail images by applying support vector machine and its robustness to nonlinear image processing.
Takei T; Ikeda M; Imai K; Yamauchi-Kawaura C; Kato K; Isoda H
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2013 Sep; 36(3):313-22. PubMed ID: 23955765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of different commercial FFDM units by means of physical characterization and contrast-detail analysis.
Rivetti S; Lanconelli N; Campanini R; Bertolini M; Borasi G; Nitrosi A; Danielli C; Angelini L; Maggi S
Med Phys; 2006 Nov; 33(11):4198-209. PubMed ID: 17153399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
