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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

188 related items for PubMed ID: 17153399

  • 1. Comparison of different commercial FFDM units by means of physical characterization and contrast-detail analysis.
    Rivetti S, Lanconelli N, Campanini R, Bertolini M, Borasi G, Nitrosi A, Danielli C, Angelini L, Maggi S.
    Med Phys; 2006 Nov; 33(11):4198-209. PubMed ID: 17153399
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Physical characteristics of GE Senographe Essential and DS digital mammography detectors.
    Ghetti C, Borrini A, Ortenzia O, Rossi R, Ordóñez PL.
    Med Phys; 2008 Feb; 35(2):456-63. PubMed ID: 18383665
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Physical characteristics of five clinical systems for digital mammography.
    Lazzari B, Belli G, Gori C, Rosselli Del Turco M.
    Med Phys; 2007 Jul; 34(7):2730-43. PubMed ID: 17821981
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Physical evaluation of a needle photostimulable phosphor based CR mammography system.
    Marshall NW, Lemmens K, Bosmans H.
    Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):811-24. PubMed ID: 22320791
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system.
    Marshall NW.
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 May 21; 51(10):2441-63. PubMed ID: 16675862
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of different computed radiography systems: physical characterization and contrast detail analysis.
    Rivetti S, Lanconelli N, Bertolini M, Nitrosi A, Burani A, Acchiappati D.
    Med Phys; 2010 Feb 21; 37(2):440-8. PubMed ID: 20229852
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Imaging properties of digital magnification radiography.
    Boyce SJ, Samei E.
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr 21; 33(4):984-96. PubMed ID: 16696475
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. High-resolution imager for digital mammography: physical characterization of a prototype sensor.
    Suryanarayanan S, Karellas A, Vedantham S, Onishi SK.
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Sep 07; 50(17):3957-69. PubMed ID: 16177523
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Study of DQE dependence with beam quality on GE essential mammography flat panel.
    García-Mollá R, Linares R, Ayala R.
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2010 Nov 25; 12(1):3176. PubMed ID: 21330969
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Physical characterization of a high-resolution CCD detector for mammography.
    Elbakri IA, Tesic MM, Xiong Q.
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Apr 21; 52(8):2171-83. PubMed ID: 17404462
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Evaluation of the imaging properties of an amorphous selenium-based flat panel detector for digital fluoroscopy.
    Hunt DC, Tousignant O, Rowlands JA.
    Med Phys; 2004 May 21; 31(5):1166-75. PubMed ID: 15191306
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Effects of exposure equalization on image signal-to-noise ratios in digital mammography: a simulation study with an anthropomorphic breast phantom.
    Liu X, Lai CJ, Whitman GJ, Geiser WR, Shen Y, Yi Y, Shaw CC.
    Med Phys; 2011 Dec 21; 38(12):6489-501. PubMed ID: 22149832
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 10.