104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2819359)
1. Enhanced risk from low-energy screen--film mammography X rays.
Brenner DJ; Amols HI
Br J Radiol; 1989 Oct; 62(742):910-4. PubMed ID: 2819359
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Mammography-oncogenecity at low doses.
Heyes GJ; Mill AJ; Charles MW
J Radiol Prot; 2009 Jun; 29(2A):A123-32. PubMed ID: 19454801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The relative biological effectiveness of low-dose mammography quality X rays in the human breast MCF-10A cell line.
Mills CE; Thome C; Koff D; Andrews DW; Boreham DR
Radiat Res; 2015 Jan; 183(1):42-51. PubMed ID: 25536231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Enhanced neoplastic transformation by mammography X rays relative to 200 kVp X rays: indication for a strong dependence on photon energy of the RBE(M) for various end points.
Frankenberg D; Kelnhofer K; Bär K; Frankenberg-Schwager M
Radiat Res; 2002 Jan; 157(1):99-105. PubMed ID: 11754647
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Mutagenicity of low-filtered 30 kVp X-rays, mammography X-rays and conventional X-rays in cultured mammalian cells.
Frankenberg-Schwager M; Garg I; Fran-Kenberg D; Greve B; Severin E; Uthe D; Göhde W
Int J Radiat Biol; 2002 Sep; 78(9):781-9. PubMed ID: 12428919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Microdosimetric analysis of various mammography spectra: lineal energy distributions and ionization cluster analysis.
Verhaegen F; Reniers B
Radiat Res; 2004 Nov; 162(5):592-9. PubMed ID: 15624315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Electron spectra and the RBE of X rays.
Kellerer AM
Radiat Res; 2002 Jul; 158(1):13-22. PubMed ID: 12071799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme.
Heyes GJ; Mill AJ; Charles MW
Br J Radiol; 2006 Mar; 79(939):195-200. PubMed ID: 16498030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Routine screening mammography: how important is the radiation-risk side of the benefit-risk equation?
Brenner DJ; Sawant SG; Hande MP; Miller RC; Elliston CD; Fu Z; Randers-Pehrson G; Marino SA
Int J Radiat Biol; 2002 Dec; 78(12):1065-7. PubMed ID: 12556334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mammography with synchrotron radiation: phase-detection techniques.
Arfelli F; Bonvicini V; Bravin A; Cantatore G; Castelli E; Palma LD; Michiel MD; Fabrizioli M; Longo R; Menk RH; Olivo A; Pani S; Pontoni D; Poropat P; Prest M; Rashevsky A; Ratti M; Rigon L; Tromba G; Vacchi A; Vallazza E; Zanconati F
Radiology; 2000 Apr; 215(1):286-93. PubMed ID: 10751500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Glandular breast dose for monoenergetic and high-energy X-ray beams: Monte Carlo assessment.
Boone JM
Radiology; 1999 Oct; 213(1):23-37. PubMed ID: 10540637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Monochromatic x-rays in digital mammography.
Lawaczeck R; Arkadiev V; Diekmann F; Krumrey M
Invest Radiol; 2005 Jan; 40(1):33-9. PubMed ID: 15597018
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Are all photon radiations similar in large absorbers?--a comparison of electron spectra.
Kellerer AM; Roos H
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 113(3):245-50. PubMed ID: 15695239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Relative biological effectiveness of mammography X-rays at the level of DNA and chromosomes in lymphocytes.
Depuydt J; Baert A; Vandersickel V; Thierens H; Vral A
Int J Radiat Biol; 2013 Jul; 89(7):532-8. PubMed ID: 23484479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Somatic radiation risk to the breast under different radiological research procedures].
John V; Ewen K
Strahlenther Onkol; 1986 Jan; 162(1):41-3. PubMed ID: 3945919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Monte Carlo simulation of primary electron production inside an a-selenium detector for x-ray mammography: physics.
Sakellaris T; Spyrou G; Tzanakos G; Panayiotakis G
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Aug; 50(16):3717-38. PubMed ID: 16077223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
