These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3683300)

  • 1. Scanned-projection digital mammography.
    Nishikawa RM; Mawdsley GE; Fenster A; Yaffe MJ
    Med Phys; 1987; 14(5):717-27. PubMed ID: 3683300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to contrast and spatial resolution in tissue equivalent breast phantoms.
    Kuzmiak CM; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Zeng D; Burns CB; Roberto C; Pavic D; Lee Y; Seo BK; Koomen M; Washburn D
    Med Phys; 2005 Oct; 32(10):3144-50. PubMed ID: 16279068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Direct digital magnification mammography with a large-surface detector made of amorphous silicon].
    Hermann KP; Hundertmark C; Funke M; von Brenndorff A; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1999 May; 170(5):503-6. PubMed ID: 10370416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Signal-to-noise properties of mammographic film-screen systems.
    Nishikawa RM; Yaffe MJ
    Med Phys; 1985; 12(1):32-9. PubMed ID: 3974523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with a conventional screen film system (SFS) and a new full-field digital mammography unit (DR) with a-Se-detector.
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Wenkel E; Schmid A; Imhoff K; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):766-8. PubMed ID: 12811687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Physical and technical aspects of digital mammography].
    Hermann KP; Funke M; Grabbe E
    Radiologe; 2002 Apr; 42(4):256-60. PubMed ID: 12063731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [ROC analysis of image quality in digital luminescence radiography in comparison with current film-screen systems in mammography].
    Wiebringhaus R; John V; Müller RD; Hirche H; Voss M; Callies R
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1995 Jul; 5(4):263-7. PubMed ID: 7548257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Recent advances in screen-film mammography.
    Haus AG
    Radiol Clin North Am; 1987 Sep; 25(5):913-28. PubMed ID: 3306773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Image quality and radiation exposure in digital mammography with storage phosphor screens in a magnification technic].
    Fiedler E; Aichinger U; Böhner C; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Bautz W
    Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):60-4. PubMed ID: 10464507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Analysis of the kinestatic charge detection system as a high detective quantum efficiency electronic portal imaging device.
    Samant SS; Gopal A
    Med Phys; 2006 Sep; 33(9):3557-67. PubMed ID: 17022252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Storage phosphor direct magnification mammography in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography--a phantom study.
    Funke M; Breiter N; Hermann KP; Oestmann JW; Grabbe E
    Br J Radiol; 1998 May; 71(845):528-34. PubMed ID: 9691898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Image quality of digital direct flat-panel mammography versus an analog screen-film technique using a low-contrast phantom.
    Krug KB; Stützer H; Schröder R; Boecker J; Poggenborg J; Lackner K
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2008 Sep; 191(3):W80-8. PubMed ID: 18716083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Digital storage phosphor mammography in a magnification technic: experimental studies for spatial resolution and for detection of microcalcifications].
    Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Hundertmark C; Sachs J; Gruhl T; Sperner W; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1997 Aug; 167(2):174-9. PubMed ID: 9333359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD).
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Wenkel E; Bautz W
    Rontgenpraxis; 2001; 54(4):123-6. PubMed ID: 11883115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluation of detector dynamic range in the x-ray exposure domain in mammography: a comparison between film-screen and flat panel detector systems.
    Cooper VN; Oshiro T; Cagnon CH; Bassett LW; McLeod-Stockmann TM; Bezrukiy NV
    Med Phys; 2003 Oct; 30(10):2614-21. PubMed ID: 14596297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Imaging properties of digital magnification radiography.
    Boyce SJ; Samei E
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):984-96. PubMed ID: 16696475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Digital mammography, computer-aided diagnosis, and telemammography.
    Feig SA; Yaffe MJ
    Radiol Clin North Am; 1995 Nov; 33(6):1205-30. PubMed ID: 7480666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Advantages of magnification in digital phase-contrast mammography using a practical X-ray tube.
    Honda C; Ohara H
    Eur J Radiol; 2008 Dec; 68(3 Suppl):S69-72. PubMed ID: 18584984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mammographic dual-screen-dual-emulsion-film combination: visibility of simulated microcalcifications and effect on image contrast.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett LW; Gold RH; Roe D; Orr J
    Radiology; 1987 Nov; 165(2):313-8. PubMed ID: 3310091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Near monochromatic X-rays for digital slot-scan mammography: initial findings.
    Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Richter K; Bick U; Fischer T; Lawaczeck R; Press WR; Schön K; Weinmann HJ; Arkadiev V; Bjeoumikhov A; Langhoff N; Rabe J; Roth P; Tilgner J; Wedell R; Krumrey M; Linke U; Ulm G; Hamm B
    Eur Radiol; 2004 Sep; 14(9):1641-6. PubMed ID: 15232713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.