138 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36437753)
1. Comparing image quality of five breast tomosynthesis systems based on radiologists' reviews of phantom data.
Sundell VM; Jousi M; Mäkelä T; Kaasalainen T; Hukkinen K
Acta Radiol; 2023 May; 64(5):1799-1807. PubMed ID: 36437753
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The impact on lesion detection via a multi-vendor study: A phantom-based comparison of digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and synthetic mammography.
Vancoillie L; Cockmartin L; Marshall N; Bosmans H
Med Phys; 2021 Oct; 48(10):6270-6292. PubMed ID: 34407213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Deep learning denoising of digital breast tomosynthesis: Observer performance study of the effect on detection of microcalcifications in breast phantom images.
Chan HP; Helvie MA; Gao M; Hadjiiski L; Zhou C; Garver K; Klein KA; McLaughlin C; Oudsema R; Rahman WT; Roubidoux MA
Med Phys; 2023 Oct; 50(10):6177-6189. PubMed ID: 37145996
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Dosimetric characterization and organ dose assessment in digital breast tomosynthesis: Measurements and Monte Carlo simulations using voxel phantoms.
Baptista M; Di Maria S; Barros S; Figueira C; Sarmento M; Orvalho L; Vaz P
Med Phys; 2015 Jul; 42(7):3788-800. PubMed ID: 26133581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparative power law analysis of structured breast phantom and patient images in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
Cockmartin L; Bosmans H; Marshall NW
Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081920. PubMed ID: 23927334
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Phantom-based analysis of variations in automatic exposure control across three mammography systems: implications for radiation dose and image quality in mammography, DBT, and CEM.
Gennaro G; Del Genio S; Manco G; Caumo F
Eur Radiol Exp; 2024 Apr; 8(1):49. PubMed ID: 38622388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. How does c-view image quality compare with conventional 2D FFDM?
Nelson JS; Wells JR; Baker JA; Samei E
Med Phys; 2016 May; 43(5):2538. PubMed ID: 27147364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of the Detection Rate of Simulated Microcalcifications in Full-Field Digital Mammography, Digital Breast Tomosynthesis, and Synthetically Reconstructed 2-Dimensional Images Performed With 2 Different Digital X-ray Mammography Systems.
Peters S; Hellmich M; Stork A; Kemper J; Grinstein O; Püsken M; Stahlhut L; Kinner S; Maintz D; Krug KB
Invest Radiol; 2017 Apr; 52(4):206-215. PubMed ID: 27861206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A quantitative metrology for performance characterization of five breast tomosynthesis systems based on an anthropomorphic phantom.
Ikejimba L; Lo JY; Chen Y; Oberhofer N; Kiarashi N; Samei E
Med Phys; 2016 Apr; 43(4):1627. PubMed ID: 27036562
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Effects on image quality of a 2D antiscatter grid in x-ray digital breast tomosynthesis: Initial experience using the dual modality (x-ray and molecular) breast tomosynthesis scanner.
Patel T; Peppard H; Williams MB
Med Phys; 2016 Apr; 43(4):1720. PubMed ID: 27036570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of digital breast tomosynthesis and 2D digital mammography using a hybrid performance test.
Cockmartin L; Marshall NW; Van Ongeval C; Aerts G; Stalmans D; Zanca F; Shaheen E; De Keyzer F; Dance DR; Young KC; Bosmans H
Phys Med Biol; 2015 May; 60(10):3939-58. PubMed ID: 25909596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A four-alternative forced choice (4AFC) methodology for evaluating microcalcification detection in clinical full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) systems using an inkjet-printed anthropomorphic phantom.
Ikejimba LC; Salad J; Graff CG; Ghammraoui B; Cheng WC; Lo JY; Glick SJ
Med Phys; 2019 Sep; 46(9):3883-3892. PubMed ID: 31135960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A phantom study comparing technical image quality of five breast tomosynthesis systems.
Sundell VM; Jousi M; Hukkinen K; Blanco R; Mäkelä T; Kaasalainen T
Phys Med; 2019 Jul; 63():122-130. PubMed ID: 31221403
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of Dose Level on Radiologists' Detection of Microcalcifications in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: An Observer Study with Breast Phantoms.
Chan HP; Helvie MA; Klein KA; McLaughlin C; Neal CH; Oudsema R; Rahman WT; Roubidoux MA; Hadjiiski LM; Zhou C; Samala RK
Acad Radiol; 2022 Jan; 29 Suppl 1():S42-S49. PubMed ID: 32950384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance of clustered microcalcification detection on breast phantom images acquired with an experimental system using variable scan angles, angular increments, and number of projection views.
Chan HP; Goodsitt MM; Helvie MA; Zelakiewicz S; Schmitz A; Noroozian M; Paramagul C; Roubidoux MA; Nees AV; Neal CH; Carson P; Lu Y; Hadjiiski L; Wei J
Radiology; 2014 Dec; 273(3):675-85. PubMed ID: 25007048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Scatter radiation intensities around a clinical digital breast tomosynthesis unit and the impact on radiation shielding considerations.
Yang K; Li X; Liu B
Med Phys; 2016 Mar; 43(3):1096-110. PubMed ID: 26936697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quantitative analysis of radiation dosage and image quality between digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) with two-dimensional synthetic mammography and full-field digital mammography (FFDM).
Choi Y; Woo OH; Shin HS; Cho KR; Seo BK; Choi GY
Clin Imaging; 2019; 55():12-17. PubMed ID: 30703693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
