302 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30523916)
1. Cascaded systems analysis of a-Se/a-Si and a-InGaZnO TFT passive and active pixel sensors for tomosynthesis.
Sengupta A; Zhao C; Konstantinidis A; Kanicki J
Phys Med Biol; 2019 Jan; 64(2):025012. PubMed ID: 30523916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Amorphous In-Ga-Zn-O thin-film transistor active pixel sensor x-ray imager for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Kanicki J
Med Phys; 2014 Sep; 41(9):091902. PubMed ID: 25186389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Three-dimensional cascaded system analysis of a 50 µm pixel pitch wafer-scale CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray detector for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Vassiljev N; Konstantinidis AC; Speller RD; Kanicki J
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Mar; 62(5):1994-2017. PubMed ID: 28072394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Large area CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray imager for digital breast tomosynthesis: Analysis, modeling, and characterization.
Zhao C; Kanicki J; Konstantinidis AC; Patel T
Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 42(11):6294-308. PubMed ID: 26520722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Theoretical investigation of the noise performance of active pixel imaging arrays based on polycrystalline silicon thin film transistors.
Koniczek M; Antonuk LE; El-Mohri Y; Liang AK; Zhao Q
Med Phys; 2017 Jul; 44(7):3491-3503. PubMed ID: 28376261
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Technical assessment of 2D and 3D imaging performance of an IGZO-based flat-panel X-ray detector.
Sheth NM; Uneri A; Helm PA; Zbijewski W; Siewerdsen JH
Med Phys; 2022 May; 49(5):3053-3066. PubMed ID: 35363391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Performance of a high fill factor, indirect detection prototype flat-panel imager for mammography.
El-Mohri Y; Antonuk LE; Zhao Q; Wang Y; Li Y; Du H; Sawant A
Med Phys; 2007 Jan; 34(1):315-27. PubMed ID: 17278517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 50 μm pixel pitch wafer-scale CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray detector for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Konstantinidis AC; Zheng Y; Anaxagoras T; Speller RD; Kanicki J
Phys Med Biol; 2015 Dec; 60(23):8977-9001. PubMed ID: 26540090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effect of amorphous selenium detector thickness on dual-energy digital breast imaging.
Hu YH; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2014 Nov; 41(11):111904. PubMed ID: 25370637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Imaging performance of an amorphous selenium digital mammography detector in a breast tomosynthesis system.
Zhao B; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2008 May; 35(5):1978-87. PubMed ID: 18561674
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Toward Scintillator High-Gain Avalanche Rushing Photoconductor Active Matrix Flat Panel Imager (SHARP-AMFPI): Initial fabrication and characterization.
Scheuermann JR; Howansky A; Hansroul M; Léveillé S; Tanioka K; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2018 Feb; 45(2):794-802. PubMed ID: 29171067
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Amorphous and polycrystalline photoconductors for direct conversion flat panel x-ray image sensors.
Kasap S; Frey JB; Belev G; Tousignant O; Mani H; Greenspan J; Laperriere L; Bubon O; Reznik A; DeCrescenzo G; Karim KS; Rowlands JA
Sensors (Basel); 2011; 11(5):5112-57. PubMed ID: 22163893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Experimental characterization of a direct conversion amorphous selenium detector with thicker conversion layer for dual-energy contrast-enhanced breast imaging.
Scaduto DA; Tousignant O; Zhao W
Med Phys; 2017 Aug; 44(8):3965-3977. PubMed ID: 28543761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Physical and psychophysical characterization of a novel clinical system for digital mammography.
Rivetti S; Lanconelli N; Bertolini M; Borasi G; Golinelli P; Acchiappati D; Gallo E
Med Phys; 2009 Nov; 36(11):5139-48. PubMed ID: 19994524
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Early experience in the use of quantitative image quality measurements for the quality assurance of full field digital mammography x-ray systems.
Marshall NW
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Sep; 52(18):5545-68. PubMed ID: 17804881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Empirical and theoretical investigation of the noise performance of indirect detection, active matrix flat-panel imagers (AMFPIs) for diagnostic radiology.
Siewerdsen JH; Antonuk LE; el-Mohri Y; Yorkston J; Huang W; Boudry JM; Cunningham IA
Med Phys; 1997 Jan; 24(1):71-89. PubMed ID: 9029542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Physical characterization and performance comparison of active- and passive-pixel CMOS detectors for mammography.
Elbakri IA; McIntosh BJ; Rickey DW
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Mar; 54(6):1743-55. PubMed ID: 19242050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype.
Vedantham S; Karellas A; Suryanarayanan S; Albagli D; Han S; Tkaczyk EJ; Landberg CE; Opsahl-Ong B; Granfors PR; Levis I; D'Orsi CJ; Hendrick RE
Med Phys; 2000 Mar; 27(3):558-67. PubMed ID: 10757607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Digital radiology using active matrix readout of amorphous selenium: theoretical analysis of detective quantum efficiency.
Zhao W; Rowlands JA
Med Phys; 1997 Dec; 24(12):1819-33. PubMed ID: 9434965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Detective quantum efficiency measured as a function of energy for two full-field digital mammography systems.
Marshall NW
Phys Med Biol; 2009 May; 54(9):2845-61. PubMed ID: 19384004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
