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 *

100 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8455518)

  • 1. Mammography focal spot measurement with a star pattern: techniques to avoid inaccuracies.
    Kimme-Smith C; Chatziioannou A
    Med Phys; 1993; 20(1):93-7. PubMed ID: 8455518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Slit camera focal spot measurement errors in mammography.
    Tang S; Barnes GT; Tanner RL
    Med Phys; 1995 Nov; 22(11 Pt 1):1803-14. PubMed ID: 8587535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Focal spot size measurements with pinhole and slit for microfocus mammography units.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett LW; Gold RH
    Med Phys; 1988; 15(3):298-303. PubMed ID: 3405132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Focal-spot measurement: comparison of slit, pinhole, and star resolution pattern techniques.
    Everson JD; Gray JE
    Radiology; 1987 Oct; 165(1):261-4. PubMed ID: 3628780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Composite x-ray image assembly for large-field digital mammography with one- and two-dimensional positioning of a focal plane array.
    Halama G; McAdoo J; Liu H
    Med Phys; 1998 Feb; 25(2):172-5. PubMed ID: 9507476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Laser-based microfocused x-ray source for mammography: feasibility study.
    Krol A; Ikhlef A; Kieffer JC; Bassano DA; Chamberlain CC; Jiang Z; Pépin H; Prasad SC
    Med Phys; 1997 May; 24(5):725-32. PubMed ID: 9167163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Measurement of focal spot size in mammography X-ray tubes.
    Law J
    Br J Radiol; 1993 Jan; 66(781):44-50. PubMed ID: 8428250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Investigation of the line-pair pattern method for evaluating mammographic focal spot performance.
    Goodsitt MM; Chan HP; Liu B
    Med Phys; 1997 Jan; 24(1):11-5. PubMed ID: 9029537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Performance comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography in clinical practice.
    Berns EA; Hendrick RE; Cutter GR
    Med Phys; 2002 May; 29(5):830-4. PubMed ID: 12033579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Acceptance testing prone stereotactic breast biopsy units.
    Kimme-Smith C; Solberg T
    Med Phys; 1994 Jul; 21(7):1197-201. PubMed ID: 7968854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Recommendations for a mammography quality assurance program.
    Craig AR; Heggie JC; McLean ID; Coakley KS; Nicoll JJ
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2001 Sep; 24(3):107-31. PubMed ID: 11764394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Monte Carlo studies on the influence of focal spot size and intensity distribution on spatial resolution in magnification mammography.
    Koutalonis M; Delis H; Spyrou G; Costaridou L; Tzanakos G; Panayiotakis G
    Phys Med Biol; 2008 Mar; 53(5):1369-84. PubMed ID: 18296767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Computer analysis of mammography phantom images (CAMPI): an application to the measurement of microcalcification image quality of directly acquired digital images.
    Chakraborty DP
    Med Phys; 1997 Aug; 24(8):1269-77. PubMed ID: 9284251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An observer study comparing spot imaging regions selected by radiologists and a computer for an automated stereo spot mammography technique.
    Goodsitt MM; Chan HP; Lydick JT; Gandra CR; Chen NG; Helvie MA; Bailey JE; Roubidoux MA; Paramagul C; Blane CE; Sahiner B; Petrick NA
    Med Phys; 2004 Jun; 31(6):1558-67. PubMed ID: 15259660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Focal spot size and scatter suppression in magnification mammography.
    Muntz EP; Logan WW
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1979 Sep; 133(3):453-9. PubMed ID: 111504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A Monte Carlo study of the influence of focal spot size, intensity distribution, breast thickness and magnification on spatial resolution of an a-Se digital mammography system using the generalized MTF.
    Sakellaris T; Koutalonis M; Spyrou G; Pascoal A
    Phys Med; 2014 May; 30(3):286-95. PubMed ID: 24011672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Practical application of a scan-rotate equalization geometry to mammography.
    Sabol JM; Soutar IC; Plewes DB
    Med Phys; 1996 Dec; 23(12):1987-96. PubMed ID: 8994163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Scatter reduction in mammography with air gap.
    Krol A; Bassano DA; Chamberlain CC; Prasad SC
    Med Phys; 1996 Jul; 23(7):1263-70. PubMed ID: 8839422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mammographic resolution: influence of focal spot intensity distribution and geometry.
    Nickoloff EL; Donnelly E; Eve L; Atherton JV; Asch T
    Med Phys; 1990; 17(3):436-47. PubMed ID: 2385201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Measurements of capillary x-ray optics with potential for use in mammographic imaging.
    Abreu CC; Kruger DG; MacDonald CA; Mistretta CA; Peppler WW; Xiao QF
    Med Phys; 1995 Nov; 22(11 Pt 1):1793-801. PubMed ID: 8587534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.