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.
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]
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]