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

120 related items for PubMed ID: 27320154

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. 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]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. X-ray spectrum optimization of full-field digital mammography: simulation and phantom study.
    Bernhardt P, Mertelmeier T, Hoheisel M.
    Med Phys; 2006 Nov 21; 33(11):4337-49. PubMed ID: 17153413
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. [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 21; 163(5):388-94. PubMed ID: 8527751
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Getting started with protocol for quality assurance of digital mammography in the clinical centre of Montenegro.
    Ivanovic S, Bosmans H, Mijovic S.
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Jul 21; 165(1-4):363-8. PubMed ID: 25862535
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Image simulation and a model of noise power spectra across a range of mammographic beam qualities.
    Mackenzie A, Dance DR, Diaz O, Young KC.
    Med Phys; 2014 Dec 21; 41(12):121901. PubMed ID: 25471961
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Contrast-to-noise ratios of different elements in digital mammography: evaluation of their potential as new contrast agents.
    Diekmann F, Sommer A, Lawaczeck R, Diekmann S, Pietsch H, Speck U, Hamm B, Bick U.
    Invest Radiol; 2007 May 21; 42(5):319-25. PubMed ID: 17414528
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Image Quality and Radiation Dose for Fibrofatty Breast using Target/filter Combinations in Two Digital Mammography Systems.
    Alkhalifah K, Asbeutah A, Brindhaban A.
    J Clin Imaging Sci; 2020 May 21; 10():56. PubMed ID: 33024611
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 20. Comparison of the polynomial model against explicit measurements of noise components for different mammography systems.
    Monnin P, Bosmans H, Verdun FR, Marshall NW.
    Phys Med Biol; 2014 Oct 07; 59(19):5741-61. PubMed ID: 25198143
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 6.