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 *

190 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2716707)

  • 1. Film-screen mammography x-ray tube anodes: molybdenum versus tungsten.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett LW; Gold RH; Rothschild P
    Med Phys; 1989; 16(2):279-83. PubMed ID: 2716707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Breast calcification and mass detection with mammographic anode-filter combinations of molybdenum, tungsten, and rhodium.
    Kimme-Smith CM; Sayre JW; McCombs MM; DeBruhl ND; Bassett LW
    Radiology; 1997 Jun; 203(3):679-83. PubMed ID: 9169688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [A bimetal anode with tungsten or rhodium? Comparative studies on image quality and dosage requirement in mammography].
    Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Moritz J; Müller D; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1995 Nov; 163(5):388-94. PubMed ID: 8527751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mammograms obtained with rhodium vs molybdenum anodes: contrast and dose differences.
    Kimme-Smith C; Wang J; DeBruhl N; Basic M; Bassett LW
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Jun; 162(6):1313-7. PubMed ID: 8191989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Mammography equipment: principles, features, selection.
    Feig SA
    Radiol Clin North Am; 1987 Sep; 25(5):897-911. PubMed ID: 3306772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimal x-ray spectra for screen-film mammography.
    Jennings RJ; Eastgate RJ; Siedband MP; Ergun DL
    Med Phys; 1981; 8(5):629-39. PubMed ID: 7290015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Tungsten anode tubes with K-edge filters for mammography.
    Beaman S; Lillicrap SC; Price JL
    Br J Radiol; 1983 Oct; 56(670):721-7. PubMed ID: 6616137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Short communication: kilovoltage measurement with rhodium target and filters on mammography X-ray machines.
    Underwood AC; Law J; Goodman DA; Robinson A; Rust A
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Aug; 69(824):769-73. PubMed ID: 8949681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Influence of anode and filter material on image quality and glandular dose for screen-film mammography.
    Desponds L; Depeursinge C; Grecescu M; Hessler C; Samiri A; Valley JF
    Phys Med Biol; 1991 Sep; 36(9):1165-82. PubMed ID: 1946601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Film and xeroradiographic images in mammography. A comparison of tungsten and molybdenum anode materials.
    Evans AL; James WB; McLellan J; Davison M
    Br J Radiol; 1975 Dec; 48(576):968-72. PubMed ID: 1218357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Physical characterization of a prototype selenium-based full field digital mammography detector.
    Saunders RS; Samei E; Jesneck JL; Lo JY
    Med Phys; 2005 Feb; 32(2):588-99. PubMed ID: 15789606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dependence of scatter on atomic number for x rays from tungsten and molybdenum anodes in the mammographic energy range.
    Aus RJ; DeWerd LA; Pearson DW; Micka JA; Ng KH
    Med Phys; 1999 Jul; 26(7):1306-11. PubMed ID: 10435532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Influence of anode/filter material and tube potential on contrast, signal-to-noise ratio and average absorbed dose in mammography: a Monte Carlo study.
    Dance DR; Thilander AK; Sandborg M; Skinner CL; Castellano IA; Carlsson GA
    Br J Radiol; 2000 Oct; 73(874):1056-67. PubMed ID: 11271898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Contrast and dose with Mo-Mo, Mo-Rh, and Rh-Rh target-filter combinations in mammography.
    Gingold EL; Wu X; Barnes GT
    Radiology; 1995 Jun; 195(3):639-44. PubMed ID: 7753987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Ambient dose equivalent and effective dose from scattered x-ray spectra in mammography for Mo/Mo, Mo/Rh and W/Rh anode/filter combinations.
    Künzel R; Herdade SB; Costa PR; Terini RA; Levenhagen RS
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Apr; 51(8):2077-91. PubMed ID: 16585846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Comparison of anode/filter combinations in digital mammography with respect to the average glandular dose.
    Uhlenbrock DF; Mertelmeier T
    Rofo; 2009 Mar; 181(3):249-54. PubMed ID: 19241602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Radiation probe for indirect evaluation of the high-voltage waveform of a Mo anode mammography unit.
    Gambaccini M; Marziani M; Rimondi O; Indovina PL
    Med Phys; 1989; 16(1):94-7. PubMed ID: 2921988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.