156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38756437)
21. Low-dose cone-beam CT via raw counts domain low-signal correction schemes: Performance assessment and task-based parameter optimization (Part II. Task-based parameter optimization).
Gomez-Cardona D; Hayes JW; Zhang R; Li K; Cruz-Bastida JP; Chen GH
Med Phys; 2018 May; 45(5):1957-1969. PubMed ID: 29532480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Radiation dosimetry of a clinical prototype dedicated cone-beam breast CT system with offset detector.
Tseng HW; Karellas A; Vedantham S
Med Phys; 2021 Mar; 48(3):1079-1088. PubMed ID: 33501686
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. High resolution microcalcification signal profiles for dedicated breast CT.
Hernandez AM; Becker AE; Lyu SH; Abbey CK; Boone JM
Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng; 2020 Feb; 11312():. PubMed ID: 33384464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Task-based detectability in CT image reconstruction by filtered backprojection and penalized likelihood estimation.
Gang GJ; Stayman JW; Zbijewski W; Siewerdsen JH
Med Phys; 2014 Aug; 41(8):081902. PubMed ID: 25086533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Anatomical background and generalized detectability in tomosynthesis and cone-beam CT.
Gang GJ; Tward DJ; Lee J; Siewerdsen JH
Med Phys; 2010 May; 37(5):1948-65. PubMed ID: 20527529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. Cone-beam CT for breast imaging: Radiation dose, breast coverage, and image quality.
O'Connell A; Conover DL; Zhang Y; Seifert P; Logan-Young W; Lin CF; Sahler L; Ning R
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Aug; 195(2):496-509. PubMed ID: 20651210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The relationship between the attenuation properties of breast microcalcifications and aluminum.
Zanca F; Van Ongeval C; Marshall N; Meylaers T; Michielsen K; Marchal G; Bosmans H
Phys Med Biol; 2010 Feb; 55(4):1057-68. PubMed ID: 20090185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Statistical model based iterative reconstruction in clinical CT systems. Part III. Task-based kV/mAs optimization for radiation dose reduction.
Li K; Gomez-Cardona D; Hsieh J; Lubner MG; Pickhardt PJ; Chen GH
Med Phys; 2015 Sep; 42(9):5209-21. PubMed ID: 26328971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Optimization of a dual-energy contrast-enhanced technique for a photon-counting digital breast tomosynthesis system: I. A theoretical model.
Carton AK; Ullberg C; Lindman K; Acciavatti R; Francke T; Maidment AD
Med Phys; 2010 Nov; 37(11):5896-907. PubMed ID: 21158302
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Patient doses and projection angle in cone beam CT.
He W; Huda W; Magill D; Tavrides E; Yao H
Med Phys; 2010 May; 37(5):2359-68. PubMed ID: 20527570
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. Three-dimensional cascaded system analysis of a 50 µm pixel pitch wafer-scale CMOS active pixel sensor x-ray detector for digital breast tomosynthesis.
Zhao C; Vassiljev N; Konstantinidis AC; Speller RD; Kanicki J
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Mar; 62(5):1994-2017. PubMed ID: 28072394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Human and model observer performance for lesion detection in breast cone beam CT images with the FDK reconstruction.
Han M; Kim B; Baek J
PLoS One; 2018; 13(3):e0194408. PubMed ID: 29543868
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Towards standardization of x-ray beam filters in digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis: Monte Carlo simulations and analytical modelling.
Shrestha S; Vedantham S; Karellas A
Phys Med Biol; 2017 Mar; 62(5):1969-1993. PubMed ID: 28075335
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Assessment of Mean Glandular Dose in Mammography System with Different Anode-Filter Combinations Using MCNP Code.
Gholamkar L; Mowlavi AA; Sadeghi M; Athari M
Iran J Radiol; 2016 Oct; 13(4):e36484. PubMed ID: 27895876
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Simulated scatter performance of an inverse-geometry dedicated breast CT system.
Bhagtani R; Schmidt TG
Med Phys; 2009 Mar; 36(3):788-96. PubMed ID: 19378739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Computational and human observer image quality evaluation of low dose, knowledge-based CT iterative reconstruction.
Eck BL; Fahmi R; Brown KM; Zabic S; Raihani N; Miao J; Wilson DL
Med Phys; 2015 Oct; 42(10):6098-111. PubMed ID: 26429285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. An examination of automatic exposure control regimes for two digital radiography systems.
Marshall NW
Phys Med Biol; 2009 Aug; 54(15):4645-70. PubMed ID: 19590115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
