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
89 related items for PubMed ID: 264140
41. Survey on image quality and dose levels used in Europe for mammography. Verdun FR, Moeckli R, Valley JF, Bochud F, Hessler C. Br J Radiol; 1996 Aug; 69(824):762-8. PubMed ID: 8949680 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
42. The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program. McLelland R, Hendrick RE, Zinninger MD, Wilcox PA. AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1991 Sep; 157(3):473-9. PubMed ID: 1872231 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. [A program devoted to dose and quality in mammography (DQM)]. Rimondi O, Gambaccini M, Indovina P, Candini G. Radiol Med; 1986 Mar; 72(3):116-20. PubMed ID: 3704212 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Standardization of image quality and radiation dose in mammography. Hendrick RE. Radiology; 1990 Mar; 174(3 Pt 1):648-54. PubMed ID: 2305044 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. The status of film/screen mammography. Results of the BENT study. Jans RG, Butler PF, McCrohan JL, Thompson WE. Radiology; 1979 Jul; 132(1):197-200. PubMed ID: 451199 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. 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 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. The history and the effect of the mammography quality assurance legislation in Michigan. Osuch JR, Camburn JF, Sienko DG, Potchen EJ. Cancer; 1994 Jul 01; 74(1 Suppl):263-70. PubMed ID: 8004596 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. Quality assurance in mammography: artifact analysis. Hogge JP, Palmer CH, Muller CC, Little ST, Smith DC, Fatouros PP, de Paredes ES. Radiographics; 1999 Jul 01; 19(2):503-22. PubMed ID: 10194792 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. The impact of mammography quality improvement legislation in Michigan: implications for the National Mammography Quality Standards Act. Fintor L, Brown M, Fischer R, Suleiman O, Garlinghouse C, Camburn J, Frazier E, Houn F. Am J Public Health; 1998 Apr 01; 88(4):667-71. PubMed ID: 9551016 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. A comparison of four mammographic image quality test objects. Payne M, Lawinski CP. Br J Radiol; 1992 Apr 01; 65(772):339-41. PubMed ID: 1581793 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. Evaluation and comparison of mammographic quality at facilities participating in a regional breast cancer awareness program. Feig SA, Galkin BM, Muir HD. Recent Results Cancer Res; 1990 Jul 01; 119():65-74. PubMed ID: 2236864 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
60. How many physicists does it take to test a mammography unit? Diffey J. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2017 Mar 01; 40(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 28236175 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]