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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9376560)

  • 1. [DIMA-magnification mammography. Phantom studies on image quality and radiation exposure of the patient].
    Hermann KP; Funke M; Brüggemeyer H; Sperner W; Gruhl T; Koch R
    Rofo; 1997 Sep; 167(3):304-10. PubMed ID: 9376560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Image quality and radiation exposure in digital mammography with storage phosphor screens in a magnification technic].
    Fiedler E; Aichinger U; Böhner C; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Bautz W
    Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):60-4. PubMed ID: 10464507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Direct digital magnification mammography with a large-surface detector made of amorphous silicon].
    Hermann KP; Hundertmark C; Funke M; von Brenndorff A; Grabbe E
    Rofo; 1999 May; 170(5):503-6. PubMed ID: 10370416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 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. Magnification mammography: a low-dose technique.
    Arnold BA; Eisenberg H; Bjarngard BE
    Radiology; 1979 Jun; 131(3):743-9. PubMed ID: 441382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [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]  

  • 10. [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]  

  • 11. Magnification survey and spot view mammography with a new microfocus X-ray unit: detail resolution and radiation exposure.
    Funke M; Breiter N; Hermann K; Oestmann J; Grabbe E
    Eur Radiol; 1998; 8(3):386-90. PubMed ID: 9510570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Image quality performance of liquid crystal display systems: influence of display resolution, magnification and window settings on contrast-detail detection.
    Bacher K; Smeets P; De Hauwere A; Voet T; Duyck P; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    Eur J Radiol; 2006 Jun; 58(3):471-9. PubMed ID: 16442770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Magnification mammography: evaluation of screen-film and xeroradiographic techniques.
    Haus AG; Paulus DD; Dodd GD; Cowart RW; Bencomo J
    Radiology; 1979 Oct; 133(1):223-6. PubMed ID: 472295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [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]  

  • 15. [Direct radiographic magnification mammography with a new microfocus tube. Experimental studies of resolution and radiation exposure].
    Post K; Hermann KP; Funke M; Hundertmark C; Breiter N; Grabbe E
    Radiologe; 1997 Aug; 37(8):604-9. PubMed ID: 9411476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Optimization of tube potential-filter combinations for film-screen mammography: a contrast detail phantom study.
    Chida K; Zuguchi M; Sai M; Saito H; Yamada T; Ishibashi T; Ito D; Kimoto N; Kohzuki M; Takahashi S
    Clin Imaging; 2005; 29(4):246-50. PubMed ID: 15967314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The XERG-mammography system: a solution to the dose-quality problem?
    Friedrich M
    Eur J Radiol; 1981 May; 1(2):143-51. PubMed ID: 7338239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [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]  

  • 19. Dual-energy cardiac imaging: an image quality and dose comparison for a flat-panel detector and x-ray image intensifier.
    Ducote JL; Xu T; Molloi S
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Jan; 52(1):183-96. PubMed ID: 17183135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Recent advances in screen-film mammography.
    Haus AG
    Radiol Clin North Am; 1987 Sep; 25(5):913-28. PubMed ID: 3306773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.