BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32191923)

  • 1. In-plane image quality and NPWE detectability index in digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Monnin P; Verdun FR; Bosmans H; Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2020 May; 65(9):095013. PubMed ID: 32191923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Task-based detectability in anatomical background in digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis and synthetic mammography.
    Monnin P; Damet J; Bosmans H; Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2024 Jan; 69(2):. PubMed ID: 38214048
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Image quality assessment in digital mammography: part II. NPWE as a validated alternative for contrast detail analysis.
    Monnin P; Marshall NW; Bosmans H; Bochud FO; Verdun FR
    Phys Med Biol; 2011 Jul; 56(14):4221-38. PubMed ID: 21701050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. NPWE model observer as a validated alternative for contrast detail analysis of digital detectors in general radiography.
    Van Peteghem N; Bosmans H; Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2016 Nov; 61(21):N575-N591. PubMed ID: 27754987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Optimization of contrast-enhanced breast imaging: Analysis using a cascaded linear system model.
    Hu YH; Scaduto DA; Zhao W
    Med Phys; 2017 Jan; 44(1):43-56. PubMed ID: 28044312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A statistical alternative to current measures of image quality in digital mammography.
    Caldwell D; Baldelli P; Phelan N; Kenny P
    Phys Med Biol; 2022 Feb; 67(3):. PubMed ID: 35038692
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Amorphous selenium flat panel detectors for digital mammography: validation of a NPWE model observer with CDMAM observer performance experiments.
    Segui JA; Zhao W
    Med Phys; 2006 Oct; 33(10):3711-22. PubMed ID: 17089837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Three-dimensional linear system analysis for breast tomosynthesis.
    Zhao B; Zhao W
    Med Phys; 2008 Dec; 35(12):5219-32. PubMed ID: 19175081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 May; 51(10):2441-63. PubMed ID: 16675862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Generalized NEQ and Detectability Index for Tomosynthesis and Cone-Beam CT: From Cascaded Systems Analysis to Human Observers.
    Gang GJ; Lee J; Stayman JW; Tward DJ; Zbijewski W; Prince JL; Siewerdsen JH
    Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng; 2010 Mar; 7622():. PubMed ID: 24307930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Measurements of system sharpness for two digital breast tomosynthesis systems.
    Marshall NW; Bosmans H
    Phys Med Biol; 2012 Nov; 57(22):7629-50. PubMed ID: 23123601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect of angular dose distribution on the detection of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis.
    Hu YH; Zhao W
    Med Phys; 2011 May; 38(5):2455-66. PubMed ID: 21776781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cascaded systems analysis of shift-variant image quality in slit-scanning breast tomosynthesis.
    Berggren K; Cederström B; Lundqvist M; Fredenberg E
    Med Phys; 2018 Oct; 45(10):4392-4401. PubMed ID: 30091470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of optical blurring of X-ray source on breast tomosynthesis image quality: Modulation transfer function, anatomical noise power spectrum, and signal detectability perspectives.
    Lee C; Baek J
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(5):e0267850. PubMed ID: 35587494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Experimental validation of a three-dimensional linear system model for breast tomosynthesis.
    Zhao B; Zhou J; Hu YH; Mertelmeier T; Ludwig J; Zhao W
    Med Phys; 2009 Jan; 36(1):240-51. PubMed ID: 19235392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quantitative image quality measurements of a digital breast tomosynthesis system.
    Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D
    Rofo; 2013 Dec; 185(12):1188-94. PubMed ID: 23888475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A task-based quality control metric for digital mammography.
    Bloomquist AK; Mainprize JG; Mawdsley GE; Yaffe MJ
    Phys Med Biol; 2014 Nov; 59(21):6621-35. PubMed ID: 25325670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Human observer performance on in-plane digital breast tomosynthesis images: Effects of reconstruction filters and data acquisition angles on signal detection.
    Lee C; Han M; Baek J
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(3):e0229915. PubMed ID: 32163472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Tailoring automatic exposure control toward constant detectability in digital mammography.
    Salvagnini E; Bosmans H; Struelens L; Marshall NW
    Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3834-47. PubMed ID: 26133585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.