235 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30753684)
1. INSTITUTIONAL BREAST DOSES IN DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY.
Lekatou A; Metaxas V; Messaris G; Antzele P; Tzavellas G; Panayiotakis G
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2019 Dec; 185(2):239-251. PubMed ID: 30753684
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Patient dose in digital mammography.
Chevalier M; Morán P; Ten JI; Fernández Soto JM; Cepeda T; Vañó E
Med Phys; 2004 Sep; 31(9):2471-9. PubMed ID: 15487727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D
Rofo; 2012 Oct; 184(10):911-8. PubMed ID: 22711250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of average glandular dose and investigation of the relationship with compressed breast thickness in dual energy contrast enhanced digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis.
Fusco R; Raiano N; Raiano C; Maio F; Vallone P; Mattace Raso M; Setola SV; Granata V; Rubulotta MR; Barretta ML; Petrosino T; Petrillo A
Eur J Radiol; 2020 May; 126():108912. PubMed ID: 32151787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Breast Radiation Dose With CESM Compared With 2D FFDM and 3D Tomosynthesis Mammography.
James JR; Pavlicek W; Hanson JA; Boltz TF; Patel BK
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2017 Feb; 208(2):362-372. PubMed ID: 28112559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effect of different exposure parameters on radiation dose in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: A phantom study.
Asbeutah AM; Brindhaban A; AlMajran AA; Asbeutah SA
Radiography (Lond); 2020 Aug; 26(3):e129-e133. PubMed ID: 32052759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessment of average glandular dose in mammography practice of a teaching hospital in Ghana.
Kyei KA; Anim-Sampong S; Ahulu EN; Antwi WK; Daniels J
Pan Afr Med J; 2024; 47():42. PubMed ID: 38681097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of radiation doses between diagnostic full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): a clinical study.
Asbeutah AM; AlMajran AA; Brindhaban A; Asbeutah SA
J Med Radiat Sci; 2020 Sep; 67(3):185-192. PubMed ID: 32495513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A survey of patient dose and clinical factors in a full-field digital mammography system.
Morán P; Chevalier M; Ten JI; Fernández Soto JM; Vañó E
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):375-9. PubMed ID: 15933140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of patient dose during a digital breast tomosynthesis.
Shakya S; Sulwathura U; Wickramanayake M; Dulshara T; Herath LHMIM; Wickramasinghe WMIS; Senanayake G
Radiography (Lond); 2023 May; 29(3):573-576. PubMed ID: 36996507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Regression Analysis between the Different Breast Dose Quantities Reported in Digital Mammography and Patient Age, Breast Thickness, and Acquisition Parameters.
Dhou S; Dalah E; AlGhafeer R; Hamidu A; Obaideen A
J Imaging; 2022 Jul; 8(8):. PubMed ID: 36005454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A survey on mean glandular dose in mammography examination and the factors affecting it in Shahid Sadoughi Hospital, Yazd, Iran.
Asadollahzadeh N; Razavi S; Zare MH
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2024 Jun; 200(9):809-821. PubMed ID: 38811346
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Average glandular dose in paired digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis acquisitions in a population based screening program: effects of measuring breast density, air kerma and beam quality.
Østerås BH; Skaane P; Gullien R; Martinsen ACT
Phys Med Biol; 2018 Jan; 63(3):035006. PubMed ID: 29311416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Local Diagnostic Reference Levels for Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis in a Tertiary Hospital in Malaysia.
Mohd Norsuddin N; Segar S; Ravintaran R; Mohd Zain N; Abdul Karim MK
Healthcare (Basel); 2022 Sep; 10(10):. PubMed ID: 36292364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Glandular doses and diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for Saudi breast cancer screening programme (2012-2021).
Albeshan SM; Alhulail AA; Almuqbil MM
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2024 Apr; 200(5):467-472. PubMed ID: 38324508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Radiation exposure of digital breast tomosynthesis using an antiscatter grid compared with full-field digital mammography.
Paulis LE; Lobbes MB; Lalji UC; Gelissen N; Bouwman RW; Wildberger JE; Jeukens CR
Invest Radiol; 2015 Oct; 50(10):679-85. PubMed ID: 26011823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Mammography Diagnostic Reference Levels (DRLs) in Ghana.
Dzidzornu E; Angmorterh SK; Ofori-Manteaw BB; Aboagye S; Dzefi-Tettey K; Ofori EK
Radiography (Lond); 2021 May; 27(2):611-616. PubMed ID: 33342686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Intra-individual comparison of average glandular dose of two digital mammography units using different anode/filter combinations.
Engelken FJ; Meyer H; Juran R; Bick U; Fallenberg E; Diekmann F
Acad Radiol; 2009 Oct; 16(10):1272-80. PubMed ID: 19632866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Investigation of breast dose in five screening mammography centres in Greece.
Tsapaki V; Tsalafoutas IA; Poga V; Louizi A; Kottou S; Koulentianos E
J Radiol Prot; 2008 Sep; 28(3):337-46. PubMed ID: 18714130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Local diagnostic reference levels (LDRLs) for full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) procedures in Morocco.
Talbi M; Mansouri ME; Nhila O; Tahiri Z; Eddaoui K; Khalis M
J Med Imaging Radiat Sci; 2022 Jun; 53(2):242-247. PubMed ID: 35365437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
