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 *

56 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 897192)

  • 1. Image quality in mammography.
    Haus AG; Doi K; Metz CE; Bernstein J
    Radiology; 1977 Oct; 125(1):77-85. PubMed ID: 897192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effect of x-ray spectra from molybdenum and tungsten target tubes on image quality in mammography.
    Haus AG; Metz CE; Chiles JT; Rossmann K
    Radiology; 1976 Mar; 118(3):705-9. PubMed ID: 1251024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Tungsten anode tubes with K-edge filters for mammography.
    Beaman S; Lillicrap SC; Price JL
    Br J Radiol; 1983 Oct; 56(670):721-7. PubMed ID: 6616137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Magnification film mammography: image quality and clinical studies.
    Sickles EA; Doi K; Genant HK
    Radiology; 1977 Oct; 125(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 897191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [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]  

  • 6. Evaluation of mammographic screen-film systems.
    Arnold BA; Webster EW; Kalisher L
    Radiology; 1978 Oct; 129(1):179-85. PubMed ID: 693873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of geometric and recording system unsharpness in mammography.
    Hau AG; Doi K; Chiles JT; Rossmann K; Mintzer RA
    Invest Radiol; 1975; 10(1):43-52. PubMed ID: 1112649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [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]  

  • 9. Optimum x-ray spectra for mammography.
    Beaman SA; Lillicrap SC
    Phys Med Biol; 1982 Oct; 27(10):1209-20. PubMed ID: 7146094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Monochromatic x-rays in digital mammography.
    Lawaczeck R; Arkadiev V; Diekmann F; Krumrey M
    Invest Radiol; 2005 Jan; 40(1):33-9. PubMed ID: 15597018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Optimization of exposure conditions for amorphous selenium direct conversion DR-based mammography system].
    Endo T; Shiraiwa M; Oiwa M; Nishida C; Morita T; Yoshikawa K; Sato Y; Hayashi T; Ichihara S; Moritani S; Hirofuji Y; Wakayama T
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2011; 67(9):1151-63. PubMed ID: 21937839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [X-ray phase imaging using a X-ray tube with a small focal spot -improvement of image quality in mammography-].
    Honda C; Ohara H; Ishisaka A; Shimada F; Endo T
    Igaku Butsuri; 2002; 22(1):21-9. PubMed ID: 12766293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Optimal beam quality selection based on contrast-to-noise ratio and mean glandular dose in digital mammography.
    Aminah M; Ng KH; Abdullah BJ; Jamal N
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2010 Dec; 33(4):329-34. PubMed ID: 20938762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Microfocal spot magnification mammography using xeroradiographic and screen-film recording systems.
    Sickles EA
    Radiology; 1979 Jun; 131(3):599-607. PubMed ID: 441362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of anode/filter combinations in digital mammography with respect to the average glandular dose.
    Uhlenbrock DF; Mertelmeier T
    Rofo; 2009 Mar; 181(3):249-54. PubMed ID: 19241602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Mammography using an ultrahigh-strip-density, stationary, focused grid.
    Dershaw DD; Masterson ME; Malik S; Cruz NM
    Radiology; 1985 Aug; 156(2):541-4. PubMed ID: 4011922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Image quality in film and xero mammography. Second paper. Reproduction of medium range contrast (author's transl)].
    Willgeroth F; Paterok EM; Säbel M; Weishaar J
    Rofo; 1980 Apr; 132(4):433-7. PubMed ID: 6450105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Film and xeroradiographic images in mammography. A comparison of tungsten and molybdenum anode materials.
    Evans AL; James WB; McLellan J; Davison M
    Br J Radiol; 1975 Dec; 48(576):968-72. PubMed ID: 1218357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Clinical advantage of xeroradiography in the diagnosis of breast cancer].
    Takahashi I; Suzuki K
    Gan No Rinsho; 1985 May; Suppl():83-95. PubMed ID: 4068235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.