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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8587546)

  • 1. Physicists in mammography--a historical perspective.
    Rothenberg LN; Haus AG
    Med Phys; 1995 Nov; 22(11 Pt 2):1923-34. PubMed ID: 8587546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of equipment performance, patient dose, imaging quality, and diagnostic coincidence in five Mexico City mammography services.
    Brandan ME; Ruiz-Trejo C; Verdejo-Silva M; Guevara M; Lozano-Zalce H; Madero-Preciado L; Martín J; Noel-Etienne LM; Ramírez-Arias JL; Soto J; Villaseñor Y
    Arch Med Res; 2004; 35(1):24-30. PubMed ID: 15036796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Technological improvements in mammography over the past 20 years.
    Haus AG
    Med Prog Technol; 1993; 19(1):31-42. PubMed ID: 8302212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Mammographic equipment, technique, and quality control.
    Friedrich MA
    Curr Opin Radiol; 1991 Aug; 3(4):571-8. PubMed ID: 1888654
    [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. Image quality measurements and metrics in full field digital mammography: an overview.
    Bosmans H; Carton AK; Rogge F; Zanca F; Jacobs J; Van Ongeval C; Nijs K; Van Steen A; Marchal G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):120-30. PubMed ID: 16461531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clinical evaluation of a new set of image quality criteria for mammography.
    Grahn A; Hemdal B; Andersson I; Ruschin M; Thilander-Klang A; Börjesson S; Tingberg A; Mattsson S; Håkansson M; Båth M; Månsson LG; Medin J; Wanninger F; Panzer W
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):389-94. PubMed ID: 15933143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Getting started with protocol for quality assurance of digital mammography in the clinical centre of Montenegro.
    Ivanovic S; Bosmans H; Mijovic S
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Jul; 165(1-4):363-8. PubMed ID: 25862535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to contrast and spatial resolution in tissue equivalent breast phantoms.
    Kuzmiak CM; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Zeng D; Burns CB; Roberto C; Pavic D; Lee Y; Seo BK; Koomen M; Washburn D
    Med Phys; 2005 Oct; 32(10):3144-50. PubMed ID: 16279068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Overview of patient dosimetry in diagnostic radiology in the USA for the past 50 years.
    Huda W; Nickoloff EL; Boone JM
    Med Phys; 2008 Dec; 35(12):5713-28. PubMed ID: 19175129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Mammography with synchrotron radiation: phase-detection techniques.
    Arfelli F; Bonvicini V; Bravin A; Cantatore G; Castelli E; Palma LD; Michiel MD; Fabrizioli M; Longo R; Menk RH; Olivo A; Pani S; Pontoni D; Poropat P; Prest M; Rashevsky A; Ratti M; Rigon L; Tromba G; Vacchi A; Vallazza E; Zanconati F
    Radiology; 2000 Apr; 215(1):286-93. PubMed ID: 10751500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. [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]  

  • 14. Global quality control perspective for the physical and technical aspects of screen-film mammography--image quality and radiation dose.
    Ng KH; Jamal N; DeWerd L
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 121(4):445-51. PubMed ID: 16709704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Analysis of digital image quality indexes for CIRS SP01 and CDMAM 3.4 mammographic phantoms.
    Mayo P; Rodenas F; Verdú G; Campayo JM; Villaescusa JI
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2008; 2008():418-21. PubMed ID: 19162682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cone-beam volume CT breast imaging: feasibility study.
    Chen B; Ning R
    Med Phys; 2002 May; 29(5):755-70. PubMed ID: 12033572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Innovative monochromatic x-ray source for high-quality and low-dose medical imaging.
    Silver EH; Shulman SD; Rehani MM
    Med Phys; 2021 Mar; 48(3):1064-1078. PubMed ID: 33368354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [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]  

  • 19. AAPM tutorial. Mammography as a radiographic system.
    Hubbard LB
    Radiographics; 1990 Jan; 10(1):103-13. PubMed ID: 2296682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [A bimetal anode with tungsten or rhodium? Comparative studies on image quality and dosage requirement in mammography].
    Funke M; Hermann KP; Breiter N; Moritz J; Müller D; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1995 Nov; 163(5):388-94. PubMed ID: 8527751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.