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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7734543)

  • 21. [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]  

  • 22. Soft copy versus hard copy reading in digital mammography.
    Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Marten K; Luftner-Nagel S; von Heyden D; Skaane P; Grabbe E
    J Digit Imaging; 2003 Dec; 16(4):341-4. PubMed ID: 14749966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Digital versus screen-film mammography: a retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program.
    Heddson B; Rönnow K; Olsson M; Miller D
    Eur J Radiol; 2007 Dec; 64(3):419-25. PubMed ID: 17383841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Physical evaluation of computed radiography as a mammographic X-ray imaging system.
    Workman A; Cowen AR; Brettle DS
    Br J Radiol; 1994 Oct; 67(802):988-96. PubMed ID: 8000844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography in Japanese population-based screening.
    Yamada T; Saito M; Ishibashi T; Tsuboi M; Matsuhashi T; Sato A; Saito H; Takahashi S; Onuki K; Ouchi N
    Radiat Med; 2004; 22(6):408-12. PubMed ID: 15648457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Interpretation of calcifications in screen/film, digitized, and wavelet-enhanced monitor-displayed mammograms: a receiver operating characteristic study.
    Kallergi M; Clarke LP; Qian W; Gavrielides M; Venugopal P; Berman CG; Holman-Ferris SD; Miller MS; Clark RA
    Acad Radiol; 1996 Apr; 3(4):285-93. PubMed ID: 8796676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. [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]  

  • 28. Clinical aspects of direct digital mammography.
    Parkin GJ
    J Digit Imaging; 1995 Feb; 8(1 Suppl 1):61-6. PubMed ID: 7734542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Digital mammography: an update.
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Fuchsjäger M; Wacker T; Hermann KP
    Eur J Radiol; 2009 Nov; 72(2):258-65. PubMed ID: 19592186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Quality control for digital mammography in the ACRIN DMIST trial: part I.
    Bloomquist AK; Yaffe MJ; Pisano ED; Hendrick RE; Mawdsley GE; Bright S; Shen SZ; Mahesh M; Nickoloff EL; Fleischman RC; Williams MB; Maidment AD; Beideck DJ; Och J; Seibert JA
    Med Phys; 2006 Mar; 33(3):719-36. PubMed ID: 16878575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Dose reduction in full-field digital mammography: an anthropomorphic breast phantom study.
    Obenauer S; Hermann KP; Grabbe E
    Br J Radiol; 2003 Jul; 76(907):478-82. PubMed ID: 12857708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms.
    Skaane P; Kshirsagar A; Stapleton S; Young K; Castellino RA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2007 Feb; 188(2):377-84. PubMed ID: 17242245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [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]  

  • 36. Screen-film and digital mammography. Image quality and radiation dose considerations.
    Haus AG; Yaffe MJ
    Radiol Clin North Am; 2000 Jul; 38(4):871-98. PubMed ID: 10943284
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicenter study.
    Bluekens AM; Holland R; Karssemeijer N; Broeders MJ; den Heeten GJ
    Radiology; 2012 Dec; 265(3):707-14. PubMed ID: 23033499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Fundamentals of digital mammography: physics, technology and practical considerations.
    Smith A
    Radiol Manage; 2003; 25(5):18-24, 26-31; quiz 32-4. PubMed ID: 14603590
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effect of image processing on the detection of cancers in digital mammography.
    Warren LM; Given-Wilson RM; Wallis MG; Cooke J; Halling-Brown MD; Mackenzie A; Chakraborty DP; Bosmans H; Dance DR; Young KC
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 Aug; 203(2):387-93. PubMed ID: 25055275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [Capacities of digital mammography in screening].
    Belotserkovtseva LD; Klimova NV; Samatova TB; Agapova NA
    Vestn Rentgenol Radiol; 2008; (4-6):33-6. PubMed ID: 21337748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.