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.
2. Optimization of x-ray spectra in digital mammography through Monte Carlo simulations. Cunha DM, Tomal A, Poletti ME. Phys Med Biol; 2012 Apr 07; 57(7):1919-35. PubMed ID: 22421418 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of dual-energy subtraction of digital mammography images under conditions found in a commercial unit. Brandan ME, Ramírez-R V. Phys Med Biol; 2006 May 07; 51(9):2307-20. PubMed ID: 16625044 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. A search for optimal x-ray spectra in iodine contrast media mammography. Ullman G, Sandborg M, Dance DR, Yaffe M, Alm Carlsson G. Phys Med Biol; 2005 Jul 07; 50(13):3143-52. PubMed ID: 15972986 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. New contrast media designed for x-ray energy subtraction imaging in digital mammography. Lawaczeck R, Diekmann F, Diekmann S, Hamm B, Bick U, Press WR, Schirmer H, Schön K, Weinmann HJ. Invest Radiol; 2003 Sep 07; 38(9):602-8. PubMed ID: 12960530 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Potential dependent superiority of gold nanoparticles in comparison to iodinated contrast agents. Jackson PA, Rahman WN, Wong CJ, Ackerly T, Geso M. Eur J Radiol; 2010 Jul 07; 75(1):104-9. PubMed ID: 19406594 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Phantom study to evaluate contrast-medium-enhanced digital subtraction mammography with a full-field indirect-detection system. Palma BA, Rosado-Méndez I, Villaseñor Y, Brandan ME. Med Phys; 2010 Feb 07; 37(2):577-89. PubMed ID: 20229866 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Optimization of technique factors for a silicon diode array full-field digital mammography system and comparison to screen-film mammography with matched average glandular dose. Berns EA, Hendrick RE, Cutter GR. Med Phys; 2003 Mar 07; 30(3):334-40. PubMed ID: 12674233 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. 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 Mar 07; 29(4):246-50. PubMed ID: 15967314 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Filter material selection for region of interest radiologic imaging. Massoumzadeh P, Rudin S, Bednarek DR. Med Phys; 1998 Feb 07; 25(2):161-71. PubMed ID: 9507475 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. [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 07; 163(5):388-94. PubMed ID: 8527751 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Dual energy CT of the chest: how about the dose? Schenzle JC, Sommer WH, Neumaier K, Michalski G, Lechel U, Nikolaou K, Becker CR, Reiser MF, Johnson TR. Invest Radiol; 2010 Jun 07; 45(6):347-53. PubMed ID: 20404737 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Intra-individual comparison of average glandular dose of two digital mammography units using different anode/filter combinations. Engelken FJ, Meyer H, Juran R, Bick U, Fallenberg E, Diekmann F. Acad Radiol; 2009 Oct 07; 16(10):1272-80. PubMed ID: 19632866 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]