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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7734543)

  • 1. Evaluation of digital mammography in diagnosis of breast cancer.
    Nawano S
    J Digit Imaging; 1995 Feb; 8(1 Suppl 1):67-9. PubMed ID: 7734543
    [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. Comparison of calcification specificity in digital mammography using soft-copy display versus screen-film mammography.
    Kim HH; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Jiroutek MR; Muller KE; Zheng Y; Kuzmiak CM; Koomen MA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2006 Jul; 187(1):47-50. PubMed ID: 16794154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Diagnostic accuracy of Fischer Senoscan Digital Mammography versus screen-film mammography in a diagnostic mammography population.
    Cole E; Pisano ED; Brown M; Kuzmiak C; Braeuning MP; Kim HH; Jong R; Walsh R
    Acad Radiol; 2004 Aug; 11(8):879-86. PubMed ID: 15288038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. [ROC analysis comparing screen film mammography and digital mammography].
    Gaspard-Bakhach S; Dilhuydy MH; Bonichon F; Barreau B; Henriques C; Maugey-Laulom B
    J Radiol; 2000 Feb; 81(2):133-9. PubMed ID: 10705143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Diagnostic digital mammography in Japan: issues to consider.
    Uematsu T
    Breast Cancer; 2010 Jul; 17(3):180-2. PubMed ID: 20082161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
    Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Current challenges of full field digital mammography.
    Van Ongeval C; Bosmans H; Van Steen A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):148-53. PubMed ID: 16461520
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Conventional versus digital mammography in the analysis of screen-detected lesions with low positive predictive value.
    Bonardi R; Ambrogetti D; Ciatto S; Gentile E; Lazzari B; Mantellini P; Nannelli E; Ristori E; Sottani L; Turco MR
    Eur J Radiol; 2005 Aug; 55(2):258-63. PubMed ID: 16036157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Accuracy of soft-copy digital mammography versus that of screen-film mammography according to digital manufacturer: ACRIN DMIST retrospective multireader study.
    Hendrick RE; Cole EB; Pisano ED; Acharyya S; Marques H; Cohen MA; Jong RA; Mawdsley GE; Kanal KM; D'Orsi CJ; Rebner M; Gatsonis C
    Radiology; 2008 Apr; 247(1):38-48. PubMed ID: 18372463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [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]  

  • 14. Studies comparing screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography in breast cancer screening: updated review.
    Skaane P
    Acta Radiol; 2009 Jan; 50(1):3-14. PubMed ID: 19037825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Digital mammographic screening in Japan.
    Ishibashi T; Kawasumi Y; Yamada T; Sai M; Uematsu T; Uchiyama N
    Breast Cancer; 2010 Jul; 17(3):159-62. PubMed ID: 20072821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Digital mammography.
    Feig SA; Yaffe MJ
    Radiographics; 1998; 18(4):893-901. PubMed ID: 9672974
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. For mammography, it's digital vs. screen-film.
    D'Orsi CJ; Karellas A
    Diagn Imaging (San Franc); 1999 Nov; Suppl Digital():D16-8. PubMed ID: 10724730
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Image quality, lesion detection, and diagnostic efficacy in digital mammography: full-field digital mammography versus computed radiography-based mammography using digital storage phosphor plates.
    Schueller G; Riedl CC; Mallek R; Eibenberger K; Langenberger H; Kaindl E; Kulinna-Cosentini C; Rudas M; Helbich TH
    Eur J Radiol; 2008 Sep; 67(3):487-96. PubMed ID: 17890036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Quality control for digital mammography: part II. Recommendations from the ACRIN DMIST trial.
    Yaffe MJ; Bloomquist AK; Mawdsley GE; Pisano ED; Hendrick RE; Fajardo LL; Boone JM; Kanal K; Mahesh M; Fleischman RC; Och J; Williams MB; Beideck DJ; Maidment AD
    Med Phys; 2006 Mar; 33(3):737-52. PubMed ID: 16878576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Digital mammography with high-resolution storage plates (CR) versus full-field digital mammography (CCD) (DR) for microcalcifications and focal lesions -- a retrospective clinical histologic analysis (n = 102)].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Lell M; Wenkel E; Böhner C; Dassel MS; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2005 Jan; 177(1):67-71. PubMed ID: 15657822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.