Processing of mammographic films: technical and clinical considerationsTABAR, L; HAUS, A. G.Radiology. 1989, Vol 173, Num 1, pp 65-69, issn 0033-8419, 5 p.Conference Paper

An investigation into the effects of suboptimal viewing conditions in screen-film mammographyROBSON, K. J.British journal of radiology. 2008, Vol 81, Num 963, pp 219-231, issn 0007-1285, 13 p.Article

Digital mammographyPISANO, Etta D; YAFFE, Martin J.Radiology. 2005, Vol 234, Num 2, pp 353-362, issn 0033-8419, 10 p.Article

Screening mammography : medical legal considerationsBRENNER, R. J.Cancer. 1990, Vol 66, Num 6, pp 1348-1350, issn 0008-543X, 3 p., SupplConference Paper

Digital Mammogram Enhancement Based on ROI Enhancement and Background SuppressionPENS, Renbin; VARSHNEY, Pramod K; HAO CHEN et al.Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering. 2008, pp 69141D.1-69141D.11, issn 0277-786X, isbn 978-0-8194-7098-0Conference Paper

Analysis of density features surrounding mammographic abnormalitiesJIANG LUAN; ENMIN SONG; MENG BO et al.Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering. 2007, pp 65342L.1-65342L.7, issn 0277-786X, isbn 978-0-8194-6656-3, 2VolConference Paper

Contourlet based mammographic image enhancementZHIBO LU; TIANZI JIANG; GUOEN HU et al.Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering. 2007, pp 65340M.1-65340M.8, issn 0277-786X, isbn 978-0-8194-6656-3, 2VolConference Paper

The axillopectoral muscle seen on mammographyKO, K; HAN, B.-K; SHIN, J. H et al.Clinical radiology. 2006, Vol 61, Num 7, pp 625-629, issn 0009-9260, 5 p.Article

Computer-based detection and prompting of mammographic abnormalitiesASTLEY, S. M.British journal of radiology. 2004, Vol 77, pp S194-S200, issn 0007-1285, NS2Article

Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia: a study of the mammographic and sonographic featuresCELLIERS, L; WONG, D. D; BOURKE, A et al.Clinical radiology. 2010, Vol 65, Num 2, pp 145-149, issn 0009-9260, 5 p.Article

The effect of Premium View post-processing software on digital mammographic reportingGOLDSTRAW, E. J; CASTELLANO, I; ASHLEY, S et al.British journal of radiology. 2010, Vol 83, Num 986, pp 122-128, issn 0007-1285, 7 p.Article

Holistic component of image perception in mammogram interpretation : Gaze-tracking studyKUNDEL, Harold L; NODINE, Calvin F; CONANT, Emily F et al.Radiology. 2007, Vol 242, Num 2, pp 396-402, issn 0033-8419, 7 p.Article

Mammographic film-processor temperature, development time, and chemistry: effect on dose, contrast, and noiseKIMME-SMITH, C; ROTHSCHILD, P. A; BASSETT, L. W et al.American journal of roentgenology (1976). 1989, Vol 152, Num 1, pp 35-40, issn 0361-803X, 6 p.Article

Proceedings/3rd. Symposium mammographicum, London, September 12-13, 1985British journal of radiology. 1986, Vol 59, Num 702, pp 631-642, issn 0007-1285Conference Proceedings

Variation of the sensitometric characteristics of seven mammographic films with processing conditionsTSALAFOUTAS, I. A; DIMAKOPOULOU, A. D; KOULENTIANOS, E. D et al.British journal of radiology. 2004, Vol 77, Num 920, pp 666-671, issn 0007-1285, 6 p.Article

Region-based wavelet coding methods for digital mammographyPENEDO, Monica; PEARLMAN, William A; TAHOCES, Pablo G et al.IEEE transactions on medical imaging. 2003, Vol 22, Num 10, pp 1288-1296, issn 0278-0062, 9 p.Article

Mammographic Screening and OverdiagnosisKOPANS, Daniel B; SMITH, Robert A; DUFFY, Stephen W et al.Radiology. 2011, Vol 260, Num 3, pp 616-620, issn 0033-8419, 5 p.Article

Community-based mammography practice: Services, charges, and interpretation methodsHENDRICK, R. Edward; CUTTER, Gary R; ELMORE, Joann G et al.American journal of roentgenology (1976). 2005, Vol 184, Num 2, pp 433-438, issn 0361-803X, 6 p.Article

A three-dimensional breast software phantom for mammography simulationBLIZNAKOVA, K; BLIZNAKOV, Z; BRAVOU, V et al.Physics in medicine & biology (Print). 2003, Vol 48, Num 22, pp 3699-3719, issn 0031-9155, 21 p.Article

An alignment test jig for measuring the effective focal-spot size of mammographic X-ray tubesRAMSDALE, M. L; HILES, P. A; LAWINSKI, C. P et al.British journal of radiology. 1989, Vol 62, Num 737, pp 484-486, issn 0007-1285, 3 p.Article

Physician Workload in MammographySMITH-BINDMAN, Rebecca; MIGLIORETTI, Diana L; ROSENBERG, Robert et al.American journal of roentgenology (1976). 2008, Vol 190, Num 2, pp 526-532, issn 0361-803X, 7 p.Article

A knowledge-based approach to CADx of mammographic massesELTER, Matthias; HAFSSLMEYER, Erik.Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering. 2008, pp 69150L.1-69150L.8, issn 0277-786X, isbn 978-0-8194-7099-7Conference Paper

Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammogramsSKAANE, Per; KSHIRSAGAR, Ashwini; STAPLETON, Sandra et al.American journal of roentgenology (1976). 2007, Vol 188, Num 2, pp 377-384, issn 0361-803X, 8 p.Article

Bias in the medical journals : A commentaryKOPANS, Daniel B.American journal of roentgenology (1976). 2005, Vol 185, Num 1, pp 176-182, issn 0361-803X, 7 p.Article

Current realities of delivering mammography services in the community : Do challenges with staffing and scheduling exist?D'ORSI, Carl; TU, Shin-Ping; ELMORE, Joann G et al.Radiology. 2005, Vol 235, Num 2, pp 391-395, issn 0033-8419, 5 p.Article