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 *

103 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8147794)

  • 1. Doses in mammography: from the phantom to the patient.
    Cross P
    Australas Radiol; 1994 Feb; 38(1):20-3. PubMed ID: 8147794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Composition of mammographic phantom materials.
    Geise RA; Palchevsky A
    Radiology; 1996 Feb; 198(2):347-50. PubMed ID: 8596830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Determination of average glandular dose with modern mammography units for two large groups of patients.
    Klein R; Aichinger H; Dierker J; Jansen JT; Joite-Barfuss S; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Zoetelief J
    Phys Med Biol; 1997 Apr; 42(4):651-71. PubMed ID: 9127443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Effect of breast composition on patient exposure in mammography].
    Asada Y; Suzuki S; Yamada M; Sakurai K; Susa H; Maeda S; Ito M; Takeuchi Y; Shirakawa H
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2004 Dec; 60(12):1675-81. PubMed ID: 15614218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improved image quality for dense breasts in mammography.
    Law J
    Br J Radiol; 1992 Jan; 65(769):50-5. PubMed ID: 1486368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiation dose affected by mammographic composition and breast size: first application of a radiation dose management system for full-field digital mammography in Korean women.
    Baek JE; Kang BJ; Kim SH; Lee HS
    World J Surg Oncol; 2017 Feb; 15(1):38. PubMed ID: 28153022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative study of dose values and image quality in mammography in the area of Madrid.
    Morán P; Chevalier M; Vanó E
    Br J Radiol; 1994 Jun; 67(798):556-63. PubMed ID: 8032809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Technique factors and their relationship to radiation dose in pendant geometry breast CT.
    Boone JM; Kwan AL; Seibert JA; Shah N; Lindfors KK; Nelson TR
    Med Phys; 2005 Dec; 32(12):3767-76. PubMed ID: 16475776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Breast dose in mammography is about 30% lower when realistic heterogeneous glandular distributions are considered.
    Hernandez AM; Seibert JA; Boone JM
    Med Phys; 2015 Nov; 42(11):6337-48. PubMed ID: 26520725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Variations in breast doses for an automatic mammography unit.
    Bor D; Tükel S; Olgar T; Aydin E
    Diagn Interv Radiol; 2008 Sep; 14(3):122-6. PubMed ID: 18814131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A new mammography dosimetric phantom.
    Almeida CD; Coutinho CM; Dantas BM; Peixoto JE; Koch HA
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Aug; 151(1):196-8. PubMed ID: 22223722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The effect of breast composition on absorbed dose and image contrast.
    Skubic SE; Fatouros PP
    Med Phys; 1989; 16(4):544-52. PubMed ID: 2770628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Breast composition and radiographic breast equivalence.
    McLean D
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1997 Mar; 20(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 9141308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Digital mammography screening: average glandular dose and first performance parameters.
    Weigel S; Girnus R; Czwoydzinski J; Decker T; Spital S; Heindel W
    Rofo; 2007 Sep; 179(9):892-5. PubMed ID: 17705112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Survey of doses in screening mammography.
    Heggie JC
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1996 Dec; 19(4):207-16. PubMed ID: 9060207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Radiation doses received in the UK Breast Screening Programme in 1997 and 1998.
    Young KC; Burch A
    Br J Radiol; 2000 Mar; 73(867):278-87. PubMed ID: 10817044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Method for determination of the mean fraction of glandular tissue in individual female breasts using mammography.
    Jansen JT; Veldkamp WJ; Thijssen MA; van Woudenberg S; Zoetelief J
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Dec; 50(24):5953-67. PubMed ID: 16333166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mammographic breast glandularity in Malaysian women: data derived from radiography.
    Jamal N; Ng KH; McLean D; Looi LM; Moosa F
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 Mar; 182(3):713-7. PubMed ID: 14975974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessment of mean glandular dose in mammography.
    Faulkner K; Law J; Robson KJ
    Br J Radiol; 1995 Aug; 68(812):877-81. PubMed ID: 7551786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A high-resolution voxel phantom of the breast for dose calculations in mammography.
    Hoeschen C; Fill U; Zankl M; Panzer W; Regulla D; Döhring W
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):406-9. PubMed ID: 15933147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.