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 *

78 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8296013)

  • 1. [The dose and quality program in mammography (DQM). Results of the study carried out in 20 Fruili-Venezia Giulia centers].
    Cressa C; Zuiani C; Bregant P; Vidimari R; de Guarrini F
    Radiol Med; 1993 Dec; 86(6):893-8. PubMed ID: 8296013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [The Dosage and Quality of Imaging program and quality assurance in mammography].
    Rimondi O; Gambaccini M; Marziani M; Candini GC; Indovina PL; Toti A; De Guglielmo E; Calicchia A
    Radiol Med; 1991; 81(1-2):69-72. PubMed ID: 2006340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Quality assurance of mammography in the province of Trent].
    Valentini A; Nassivera E; Voltolini A; Volani M; Gottardi S
    Radiol Med; 1993 Sep; 86(3):240-6. PubMed ID: 8210532
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [The procedures and results of a quality control program in mammography carried out on a regional basis].
    Milano F; Rosselli Del Turco M; Maggi E; Certo N; Morrone D; Lazzeri B
    Radiol Med; 1996 Mar; 91(3):187-93. PubMed ID: 8628928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Quality assurance in screening mammography.
    Health Devices; 1990; 19(5-6):152-98. PubMed ID: 2372321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [Experimental investigations for dose reduction by optimizing the radiation quality for digital mammography with an a-Se detector].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Hermann KP; Wenkel E; Böhner C; Lell M; Dassel MS; Bautz WA
    Rofo; 2007 May; 179(5):487-91. PubMed ID: 17436182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Optimization of tube potential-filter combinations for film-screen mammography: a contrast detail phantom study.
    Chida K; Zuguchi M; Sai M; Saito H; Yamada T; Ishibashi T; Ito D; Kimoto N; Kohzuki M; Takahashi S
    Clin Imaging; 2005; 29(4):246-50. PubMed ID: 15967314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Contrast-to-noise ratio in magnification mammography: a Monte Carlo study.
    Koutalonis M; Delis H; Spyrou G; Costaridou L; Tzanakos G; Panayiotakis G
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Jun; 52(11):3185-99. PubMed ID: 17505097
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Review of the first 50 cases completed by the RACR mammography QA programme: phantom image quality, processor control and dose considerations.
    McLean D; Eckert M; Heard R; Chan W
    Australas Radiol; 1997 Nov; 41(4):387-91. PubMed ID: 9409037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Quality control of mammography: potential use of a new device for testing the image quality and the dose].
    Di Maggio C; Gennaro G; Gambaccini M; Cattozzo S
    Radiol Med; 1996 Sep; 92(3):261-6. PubMed ID: 8975313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Experiences with phantom measurements in different mammographic systems].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Lell M; Kuchar I; Bautz W
    Rofo; 2002 Oct; 174(10):1243-6. PubMed ID: 12375196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [A program devoted to dose and quality in mammography (DQM)].
    Rimondi O; Gambaccini M; Indovina P; Candini G
    Radiol Med; 1986 Mar; 72(3):116-20. PubMed ID: 3704212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Intra-individual comparison of average glandular dose of two digital mammography units using different anode/filter combinations.
    Engelken FJ; Meyer H; Juran R; Bick U; Fallenberg E; Diekmann F
    Acad Radiol; 2009 Oct; 16(10):1272-80. PubMed ID: 19632866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Reference levels for image quality in mammography.
    Zdesar U
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):170-2. PubMed ID: 18375465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Implementation of the European protocol for quality control of the technical aspects of mammography screening in Bulgaria.
    Vassileva J; Avramova-Cholakova S; Dimov A; Lichev A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):403-5. PubMed ID: 15933146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Mammography -a guidance level and the present situation of mammographic dose-].
    Terada H
    Igaku Butsuri; 2002; 22(2):65-73. PubMed ID: 12766282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Are phantoms useful for predicting the potential of dose reduction in full-field digital mammography?
    Gennaro G; Katz L; Souchay H; Alberelli C; di Maggio C
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Apr; 50(8):1851-70. PubMed ID: 15815100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Image quality and optical density in mammography: study on phantoms].
    Stinés J; Noël A; Estivalet S; Troufléau P; Netter E; Quinquis J
    J Radiol; 1998 Apr; 79(4):331-5. PubMed ID: 9757259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Quality assurance breast phantoms for screen-film mammography: design and use.
    Stanton L; Villafana T
    Appl Radiol; 1989 Nov; 18(11):41-8. PubMed ID: 10304413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Survey of mammography practice in Croatia: equipment performance, image quality and dose.
    Faj D; Posedel D; Stimac D; Ivezic Z; Kasabasic M; Ivkovic A; Kubelka D; Ilakovac V; Brnic Z; Bjelac OC
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 131(4):535-40. PubMed ID: 18940818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.