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 *

36 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 877263)

  • 21. Digital mammography image quality: image display.
    Siegel E; Krupinski E; Samei E; Flynn M; Andriole K; Erickson B; Thomas J; Badano A; Seibert JA; Pisano ED
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Aug; 3(8):615-27. PubMed ID: 17412136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Medical devices; performance standards for dental and mammographic X-ray devices; amendment--FDA. Proposed rule.
    Fed Regist; 1998 Oct; 63(209):57957-63. PubMed ID: 10185846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Image quality in digital mammography: image acquisition.
    Williams MB; Yaffe MJ; Maidment AD; Martin MC; Seibert JA; Pisano ED
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Aug; 3(8):589-608. PubMed ID: 17412134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Interpolation algorithms for digital mammography systems with multiple detectors.
    Liu H; Wang G; Chen J; Fajardo LL
    Acad Radiol; 1999 Mar; 6(3):170-5. PubMed ID: 10898036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Evaluation of new image processing conditions for digital mammograms from Fuji computed radiography.
    Kano H; Endo T; Ikeda M; Oiwa M; Ishigaki T
    Nagoya J Med Sci; 2006 Jun; 68(3-4):131-8. PubMed ID: 16967779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Zero-roentgen mammography.
    Annett CH
    Med Phys; 1978; 5(6):569. PubMed ID: 732785
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Body image (author's transl)].
    Yu YM
    Hu Li Za Zhi; 1975 Oct; 22(4):39-46. PubMed ID: 1044681
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Can the average glandular dose in routine digital mammography screening be reduced? A pilot study using revised image quality criteria.
    Hemdal B; Andersson I; Grahn A; Håkansson M; Ruschin M; Thilander-Klang A; Båth M; Börjesson S; Medin J; Tingberg A; Månsson LG; Mattsson S
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):383-8. PubMed ID: 15933142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [Film-screen combinations for mammography].
    Säbel M; Aichinger H
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1991 May; 1(3):105-12. PubMed ID: 1878377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [X-ray examination of the breast (author's transl)].
    Friedrich M
    Rontgenblatter; 1981 Apr; 34(4):151-60. PubMed ID: 7015468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [Proposals for standardizing the image quality of mammography (author's transl)].
    Frischbier HJ; Gregl A; Hoeffken W; Hüppe JR
    Radiologe; 1977 May; 17(5):193-4. PubMed ID: 877263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]     [New Search]
    of 2.