110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30375362)
21. Ionization chamber dosimetry based on
Araki F; Ohno T; Umeno S
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Sep; 63(18):185018. PubMed ID: 30101751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Towards standardization of x-ray beam filters in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: Monte Carlo simulations and analytical modelling.
Shrestha S; Vedantham S; Karellas A
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Mar; 62(5):1969-1993. PubMed ID: 28075335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A high-resolution voxel phantom of the breast for dose calculations in mammography.
Hoeschen C; Fill U; Zankl M; Panzer W; Regulla D; Döhring W
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):406-9. PubMed ID: 15933147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. An investigation into the impact of anatomical variation upon mean glandular dose produced within a standard breast.
Wilkinson LE; Heggie JC; Johnston PN
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1999 Jun; 22(2):53-63. PubMed ID: 10474976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Breast fat volume measurement using wide-bore 3 T MRI: comparison of traditional mammographic density evaluation with MRI density measurements using automatic segmentation.
Petridou E; Kibiro M; Gladwell C; Malcolm P; Toms A; Juette A; Borga M; Dahlqvist Leinhard O; Romu T; Kasmai B; Denton E
Clin Radiol; 2017 Jul; 72(7):565-572. PubMed ID: 28363661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Fatty and fibroglandular tissue volumes in the breasts of women 20-83 years old: comparison of X-ray mammography and computer-assisted MR imaging.
Lee NA; Rusinek H; Weinreb J; Chandra R; Toth H; Singer C; Newstead G
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1997 Feb; 168(2):501-6. PubMed ID: 9016235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Monte Carlo simulation for the estimation of the glandular breast dose for a digital breast tomosynthesis system.
Rodrigues L; Magalhaes LA; Braz D
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Dec; 167(4):576-83. PubMed ID: 25480841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparison of mammography radiation dose values obtained from direct incident air kerma measurements with values from measured X-ray spectral data.
Assiamah M; Nam TL; Keddy RJ
Appl Radiat Isot; 2005 Apr; 62(4):551-60. PubMed ID: 15701409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Lesion Segmentation in Automated 3D Breast Ultrasound: Volumetric Analysis.
Agarwal R; Diaz O; Lladó X; Gubern-Mérida A; Vilanova JC; Martí R
Ultrason Imaging; 2018 Mar; 40(2):97-112. PubMed ID: 29182056
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Monte Carlo simulation for correlation analysis of average glandular dose by breast thickness and glandular ratio in breast tissue.
Kim ST; Cho JK
Technol Health Care; 2014; 22(3):345-50. PubMed ID: 24704647
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol.
Dance DR; Skinner CL; Young KC; Beckett JR; Kotre CJ
Phys Med Biol; 2000 Nov; 45(11):3225-40. PubMed ID: 11098900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Volumetric lean percentage measurement using dual energy mammography.
Ducote JL; Klopfer MJ; Molloi S
Med Phys; 2011 Aug; 38(8):4498-504. PubMed ID: 21928619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Spectral optimization for dedicated breast CT.
Weigel M; Vollmar SV; Kalender WA
Med Phys; 2011 Jan; 38(1):114-24. PubMed ID: 21361181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Monte Carlo simulation of average glandular dose and an investigation of influencing factors.
Nigapruke K; Puwanich P; Phaisangittisakul N; Youngdee W
J Radiat Res; 2010; 51(4):441-8. PubMed ID: 20523013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Variations in breast doses for an automatic mammography unit.
Bor D; Tükel S; Olgar T; Aydin E
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2008 Sep; 14(3):122-6. PubMed ID: 18814131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Patterns of breast skin thickness In normal mammograms.
Willson SA; Adam EJ; Tucker AK
Clin Radiol; 1982 Nov; 33(6):691-3. PubMed ID: 7140152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Normalized mean glandular dose computation from mammography using GATE: a validation study.
Myronakis ME; Zvelebil M; Darambara DG
Phys Med Biol; 2013 Apr; 58(7):2247-65. PubMed ID: 23475310
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Breast dose in mammography is about 30% lower when realistic heterogeneous glandular distributions are considered.
Hernandez AM; Seibert JA; Boone JM
Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 42(11):6337-48. PubMed ID: 26520725
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Technique factors and their relationship to radiation dose in pendant geometry breast CT.
Boone JM; Kwan AL; Seibert JA; Shah N; Lindfors KK; Nelson TR
Med Phys; 2005 Dec; 32(12):3767-76. PubMed ID: 16475776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. An unsupervised automatic segmentation algorithm for breast tissue classification of dedicated breast computed tomography images.
Caballo M; Boone JM; Mann R; Sechopoulos I
Med Phys; 2018 Jun; 45(6):2542-2559. PubMed ID: 29676025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
