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 *

75 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9356619)

  • 1. Entrance skin exposure and mean glandular dose: effect of scatter and field gradient at mammography.
    Ng KH; Aus RJ; DeWerd LA; Vetter JR
    Radiology; 1997 Nov; 205(2):395-8. PubMed ID: 9356619
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Spectral dependence of glandular tissue dose in screen-film mammography.
    Wu X; Barnes GT; Tucker DM
    Radiology; 1991 Apr; 179(1):143-8. PubMed ID: 2006265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of full field digital (FFD) and computed radiography (CR) mammography systems in Greece.
    Kalathaki M; Hourdakis CJ; Economides S; Tritakis P; Kalyvas N; Simantirakis G; Manousaridis G; Kaisas I; Kamenopoulou V
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):202-5. PubMed ID: 21821614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Average glandular dose with amorphous silicon full-field digital mammography - Clinical results.
    Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Marten K; Kehbel S; Fischer U; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 2002 Jun; 174(6):696-9. PubMed ID: 12063597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Mammography dosimetry using an in-house developed polymethyl methacrylate phantom.
    Sharma R; Sharma SD; Mayya YS; Chourasiya G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Aug; 151(2):379-85. PubMed ID: 22232773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluation of mean glandular dose in a full-field digital mammography unit in Tabriz, Iran.
    Alizadeh Riabi H; Mehnati P; Mesbahi A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010 Dec; 142(2-4):222-7. PubMed ID: 20823039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a flat-panel x-ray detector based on amorphous silicon in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography].
    Hermann KP; Obenauer S; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 2000 Nov; 172(11):940-5. PubMed ID: 11142129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Radiation exposure in x-ray mammography].
    Säbel M; Aichinger U; Schulz-Wendtland R
    Rofo; 2001 Feb; 173(2):79-91. PubMed ID: 11253092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Normalized average glandular dose in magnification mammography.
    Liu B; Goodsitt M; Chan HP
    Radiology; 1995 Oct; 197(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 7568836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Are phantoms useful for predicting the potential of dose reduction in full-field digital mammography?
    Gennaro G; Katz L; Souchay H; Alberelli C; di Maggio C
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Apr; 50(8):1851-70. PubMed ID: 15815100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Real-time estimation system for mean glandular dose in mammography.
    Matsumoto M; Inoue S; Honda I; Yamamoto S; Ueguchi T; Ogata Y; Johkoh T
    Radiat Med; 2003; 21(6):280-4. PubMed ID: 14743903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a selenium flat-panel detector].
    Gosch D; Jendrass S; Scholz M; Kahn T
    Rofo; 2006 Jul; 178(7):693-7. PubMed ID: 16761214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Female breast, lung, and pelvic organ radiation from dose-reduced 64-MDCT thoracic examination protocols: a phantom study.
    Litmanovich D; Tack D; Lin PJ; Boiselle PM; Raptopoulos V; Bankier AA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2011 Oct; 197(4):929-34. PubMed ID: 21940581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dedicated breast CT: radiation dose and image quality evaluation.
    Boone JM; Nelson TR; Lindfors KK; Seibert JA
    Radiology; 2001 Dec; 221(3):657-67. PubMed ID: 11719660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Evaluation of radiation dose, focal spot, and automatic exposure of newer film-screen mammography units.
    Kimme-Smith C; Bassett LW; Gold RH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1987 Nov; 149(5):913-7. PubMed ID: 3499794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Mammographic image quality and exposure in South East Asia.
    Ng KH; DeWerd LA; Schmidt RC
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2000 Dec; 23(4):135-7. PubMed ID: 11376538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The resulting skin dose in two-view mammography examinations.
    Adliene D; Cibulskaite I; Laurikaitiene J; Adlys G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010; 139(1-3):298-302. PubMed ID: 20200100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. JOURNAL CLUB: Scatter Radiation Dose From Digital Screening Mammography Measured in a Representative Patient Population.
    Chetlen AL; Brown KL; King SH; Kasales CJ; Schetter SE; Mack JA; Zhu J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Feb; 206(2):359-64; quiz 365. PubMed ID: 26797364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Assessment of mean glandular dose in mammography.
    Faulkner K; Law J; Robson KJ
    Br J Radiol; 1995 Aug; 68(812):877-81. PubMed ID: 7551786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Normalized average glandular dose in molybdenum target-rhodium filter and rhodium target-rhodium filter mammography.
    Wu X; Gingold EL; Barnes GT; Tucker DM
    Radiology; 1994 Oct; 193(1):83-9. PubMed ID: 8090926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.