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

264 related items for PubMed ID: 19241602

  • 1. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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; 16(10):1272-80. PubMed ID: 19632866
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. [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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. [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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Influence of anode-filter combinations on image quality and radiation dose in 965 women undergoing mammography.
    Thilander-Klang AC, Ackerholm PH, Berlin IC, Bjurstam NG, Mattsson SL, Månsson LG, von Schéele C, Thunberg SJ.
    Radiology; 1997 May; 203(2):348-54. PubMed ID: 9114087
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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; 30(3):334-40. PubMed ID: 12674233
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. 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; 29(4):246-50. PubMed ID: 15967314
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Breast calcification and mass detection with mammographic anode-filter combinations of molybdenum, tungsten, and rhodium.
    Kimme-Smith CM, Sayre JW, McCombs MM, DeBruhl ND, Bassett LW.
    Radiology; 1997 Jun; 203(3):679-83. PubMed ID: 9169688
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Experimental investigation on the choice of the tungsten/rhodium anode/filter combination for an amorphous selenium-based digital mammography system.
    Toroi P, Zanca F, Young KC, van Ongeval C, Marchal G, Bosmans H.
    Eur Radiol; 2007 Sep; 17(9):2368-75. PubMed ID: 17268798
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Ambient dose equivalent and effective dose from scattered x-ray spectra in mammography for Mo/Mo, Mo/Rh and W/Rh anode/filter combinations.
    Künzel R, Herdade SB, Costa PR, Terini RA, Levenhagen RS.
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Apr 21; 51(8):2077-91. PubMed ID: 16585846
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Mammograms obtained with rhodium vs molybdenum anodes: contrast and dose differences.
    Kimme-Smith C, Wang J, DeBruhl N, Basic M, Bassett LW.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Jun 21; 162(6):1313-7. PubMed ID: 8191989
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a selenium flat-panel detector].
    Gosch D, Jendrass S, Scholz M, Kahn T.
    Rofo; 2006 Jul 21; 178(7):693-7. PubMed ID: 16761214
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. 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 21; 193(1):83-9. PubMed ID: 8090926
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. The relationship between the attenuation properties of breast microcalcifications and aluminum.
    Zanca F, Van Ongeval C, Marshall N, Meylaers T, Michielsen K, Marchal G, Bosmans H.
    Phys Med Biol; 2010 Feb 21; 55(4):1057-68. PubMed ID: 20090185
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis.
    Olgar T, Kahn T, Gosch D.
    Rofo; 2012 Oct 21; 184(10):911-8. PubMed ID: 22711250
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. 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]

  • 18. Patient dose in digital mammography.
    Chevalier M, Morán P, Ten JI, Fernández Soto JM, Cepeda T, Vañó E.
    Med Phys; 2004 Sep 07; 31(9):2471-9. PubMed ID: 15487727
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Contrast and dose with Mo-Mo, Mo-Rh, and Rh-Rh target-filter combinations in mammography.
    Gingold EL, Wu X, Barnes GT.
    Radiology; 1995 Jun 07; 195(3):639-44. PubMed ID: 7753987
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Detective quantum efficiency measured as a function of energy for two full-field digital mammography systems.
    Marshall NW.
    Phys Med Biol; 2009 May 07; 54(9):2845-61. PubMed ID: 19384004
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 14.