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)

  • 21. Image quality of digital direct flat-panel mammography versus an analog screen-film technique using a phantom model.
    Krug KB; Stützer H; Girnus R; Zähringer M; Gossmann A; Winnekendonk G; Lackner K
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):399-407. PubMed ID: 17242248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a selenium flat-panel detector].
    Gosch D; Jendrass S; Scholz M; Kahn T
    Rofo; 2006 Jul; 178(7):693-7. PubMed ID: 16761214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Effect of scatter and an antiscatter grid on the performance of a slot-scanning digital mammography system.
    Shen SZ; Bloomquist AK; Mawdsley GE; Yaffe MJ; Elbakri I
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):1108-15. PubMed ID: 16696488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Digital image magnification mammography with the storage-screen technique. Standardized and findings-oriented image processing parameters].
    Hundertmark C; Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Grabbe E
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1997 May; 7(3):135-40. PubMed ID: 9296608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. On the noise variance of a digital mammography system.
    Burgess A
    Med Phys; 2004 Jul; 31(7):1987-95. PubMed ID: 15305451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The first trial of phase contrast imaging for digital full-field mammography using a practical molybdenum x-ray tube.
    Tanaka T; Honda C; Matsuo S; Noma K; Oohara H; Nitta N; Ota S; Tsuchiya K; Sakashita Y; Yamada A; Yamasaki M; Furukawa A; Takahashi M; Murata K
    Invest Radiol; 2005 Jul; 40(7):385-96. PubMed ID: 15973129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Detectors for digital mammography.
    Yaffe MJ; Mainprize JG
    Technol Cancer Res Treat; 2004 Aug; 3(4):309-24. PubMed ID: 15270582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Flat-panel digital mammography system: contrast-detail comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images.
    Suryanarayanan S; Karellas A; Vedantham S; Ved H; Baker SP; D'Orsi CJ
    Radiology; 2002 Dec; 225(3):801-7. PubMed ID: 12461264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A detector for scanned projection radiography.
    Sones RA; Lauro KL; Cattell CL
    Radiology; 1990 May; 175(2):553-9. PubMed ID: 2326481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Visualization of microcalcifications on mammographies obtained by digital full-field mammography in comparison to conventional film-screen mammography].
    Diekmann S; Bick U; von Heyden H; Diekmann F
    Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):775-9. PubMed ID: 12811689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Optimal x-ray spectra for screen-film mammography.
    Jennings RJ; Eastgate RJ; Siedband MP; Ergun DL
    Med Phys; 1981; 8(5):629-39. PubMed ID: 7290015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Film-screen combinations in mammography].
    Friedrich M
    Z Lymphol; 1983 Dec; 7(2):92-103. PubMed ID: 6673399
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Screen-film mammographic technique for breast cancer screening.
    Stanton L; Day JL; Villafana T; Miller CH; Lightfoot DA
    Radiology; 1987 May; 163(2):471-9. PubMed ID: 3562829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Contrast-detail detectability analysis: comparison of a digital spot mammography system and an analog screen-film mammography system.
    Liu H; Fajardo LL; Barrett JR; Baxter RA
    Acad Radiol; 1997 Mar; 4(3):197-203. PubMed ID: 9084777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Dose efficiency and low-contrast detectability of an amorphous silicon x-ray detector for digital radiography.
    Aufrichtig R; Xue P
    Phys Med Biol; 2000 Sep; 45(9):2653-69. PubMed ID: 11008963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Current status and issues of screening digital mammography in Japan.
    Yamada T
    Breast Cancer; 2010 Jul; 17(3):163-8. PubMed ID: 20143190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Clinical trial of mammography with film-screen-combinations. Part 1: Selection of a suitable film-screen system].
    Säbel M; Paterok EM; Weishaar J; Willgeroth F
    Rontgenpraxis; 1981; 34(11):458-66. PubMed ID: 7313855
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [X-ray phase imaging using a X-ray tube with a small focal spot -improvement of image quality in mammography-].
    Honda C; Ohara H; Ishisaka A; Shimada F; Endo T
    Igaku Butsuri; 2002; 22(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 12766293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.