No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Physical evaluation of a needle photostimulable phosphor based CR mammography system
2. A. Mackenzie and I. D. Honey, “Characterization of noise sources for two generations of computed radiography systems using powder and crystalline photostimulable phosphors,” Med. Phys. 34, 3345–3357 (2007).
3. D. A. N. Vandenbroucke and P. J. R. Leblans, “CR Mammography: Image quality measurement and model calculation for needle vs. powder imaging plate,” in Digital Mammography 10th International Workshop, IWDM 2010, Girona, Spain, J Martí, A Oliver, J Freixenet, and R Martí, eds. (Springer, Berlin, 2010), pp. 219–226.
4. P. Skaane, S. Hofvind, and A. Skjennald, “Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: Follow-up and final results of Oslo II study,” Radiology 244, 708–717 (2007).
5. N. M. Hambly, M. M. McNicholas, N. Phelan, G. C. Hargaden, A. O’Doherty, and F. L. Flanagan, “Comparison of digital mammography and screen-film mammography in breast cancer screening: A review in the Irish breast screening program,” Am. J. Roentgen. 193, 1010–1018 (2009).
6. N. M. Perry, N. Patani, S. E. Milner, K. Pinker, K. Mokbel, P. C. Allgood, and S. W. Duffy, “The impact of digital mammography on screening a young cohort of women for breast cancer in an urban specialist breast unit,” Eur. Radiol. 21, 676–682 (2011).
7. E. D. Pisano, C. Gatsonis, E. Hendrick, M. Yaffe, J. K. Baum, S. Acharyya, E. F. Conant, L. L. Fajardo, L. Bassett, C. D’Orsi, R. Jong, and M. Rebner, “Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening,” N. Engl. J. Med. 353, 1773–1783 (2005).
8. B. Heddson, K. Rönnow, M. Olsson, and D. Miller, “Digital versus screen-film mammography: A retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program,” Eur. J. Radiol. 64, 419–425 (2007).
9. European Guidelines for Breast Cancer Screening, The European Protocol for the Quality Control of the Physical and Technical Aspects of Mammography Screening. Part B: Digital Mammography, 4th ed. (European Commission, Luxembourg, 2006).
10. C. E. Metz, R. F. Wagner, K. Doi, D. G. Brown, R. M. Nishikawa, and K. J. Myers, “Toward consensus on quantitative assessment of medical imaging systems,” Med. Phys. 22, 1057–1061 (1995).
11. K. A. Fetterly and B. A. Schueler, “Performance evaluation of a “dual-side read” dedicated mammography computed radiography system,” Med. Phys. 30, 1843–1854 (2003).
12. P. Monnin, D. Gutierrez, D. Bulling, D. Lepori, J.-F. Valley, and F. R. Verdun, “A comparison of the performance of modern screen-film and digital mammography systems,” Phys. Med. Biol. 50, 2617–2631 (2005).
13. P. Monnin, D. Gutierrez, S. Bulling, D. Guntern, and F. R. Verdun, “A comparison of the performance of digital mammography systems,” Med. Phys. 34, 906–914 (2007).
14. N. W. Marshall, P. Monnin, H. Bosmans, F. O. Bochud, and F. R. Verdun, “Image quality assessment in digital mammography: Part I. Technical characterization of the systems,” Phys. Med. Biol. 56, 4201–4220 (2011).
15. H. Bosmans, K. Lemmens, J. Jacobs, B. Verbrugge, K. Michielsen, F. Zanca, J. Nens, C. Van Ongeval, and G. Marchal, “Comparative technical study of two generations of CR plates for digital mammography,” in Digital Mammography 9th International Workshop, IWDM 2008 Lecture Notes in Computer Science, L. Krupinski, ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2008), pp 724–731.
16. NHSBSP (National Health Service Breast Screening Programme), Technical Evaluation of Agfa DX-M Mammography CR Reader With HM5.0 Needle Image Plate, NHSBSP Equipment Report No. 0905 (NHSBSP Publications, Sheffield, 2009).
18. A. R. Lubinsky, W. Zhao, G. Ristic, and J. A. Rowlands, “Screen optics effects on detective quantum efficiency in digital radiography: Zero-frequency effects,” Med. Phys. 33, 1499–1509 (2006).
19. C. Watt, K. Yan, G. DeCrescenzo, and J. A. Rowlands, “The physics of computed radiography: Measurements of pulse height spectra of photostimulable phosphor screens using direct luminescence,” Med. Phys. 32, 3589–3598 (2005).
20. IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) Medical electrical equipment—Characteristics of digital X-ray image devices—Part 1: Determination of the detective quantum efficiency. IEC 62220-1-2 (International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland) (2005).
21. E. Samei, M. J. Flynn, and D. A. Reimann “A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device,” Med. Phys. 25, 102–113 (1998).
22. N. W. Marshall, “A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system,” Phys. Med. Biol. 51, 2441–2463 (2006).
24. G. Borasi, A. Nitrosi, P. Ferrari, and D. Tassoni, “On site evaluation of three flat panel detectors for digital radiography,” Med. Phys. 30, 1719–1731 (2003).
26. NHSBSP (National Health Service Breast Screening Programme), Calculation of Quantitative Image Quality Parameters, NHSBSP Equipment Report No. 0902 (NHSBSP Publications, Sheffield, 2009).
27. J. C. Dainty and R. Shaw, Image science—Principles, analysis and evaluation of photographic-type imaging processes (Academic, London, 1974).
28. J. T. Dobbins III, E. Samei, N. T. Ranger, and Y. Chen, “Intercomparison of methods for image quality characterization. II. Noise power spectrum,” Med. Phys. 33, 1466–1475 (2006).
29. W. Hillen, U. Schiebel, and T. Zaengel, “Imaging performance of a digital storage phosphor system,” Med. Phys. 14, 744–751 (1987).
30. S. M. Kengylics, J. H. Launders, and A. R. Cowen, “Physical imaging performance of a compact computed radiography acquisition device,” Med. Phys. 25, 354–360 (1998).
31. A. Alsager, K. C. Young, and J. M. Oduko, “Impact of heel effect and ROI size on the determination of contrast-to-noise ratio for digital mammography systems,” Proc. SPIE 6913, 69134I (2008).
34. N. Karssemeijer and M. A. O. Thijssen, “Determination of contrast-detail curves of mammography systems by automated image analysis,” in Digital Mammography, K. Doi, M. L. Giger, R. M. Nishikawa, and R. A. Scmidt, eds. (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1996), pp. 155–160 (1996).
35. K. C. Young, J. J. H. Cook, J. M. Okudo, and H. Bosmans, “Comparison of software and human observers in reading images of the CDMAM test object to assess digital mammography systems,” Proc. SPIE 6142, 614206 (2006).
36. D. R. Dance, C. L. Skinner, Y. C. Young, J. R. Beckett, and C. J. Kotre, “Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol,” Phys. Med. Biol. 45, 3225–3240 (2000).
37. K. J. Robson, “A parametric method for determining mammographic x-ray tube output and half value layer,” Brit. J. Radiol. 74, 335–340 (2001).
38. H. Illers, D. A. N. Vandenbroucke, and E. Buhr, “Measurement of correlated noise in images of computed radiography systems and its influence on the detective quantum efficiency,” Proc. SPIE 5368, 639–647 (2004).
39. J. A. Rowlands and J. Yorkston, “Flat Panel Detectors for Digital Radiology,” Physics and Psychophysics, J. Beutel, H. L. Kundel, and R. L. Van Metter, ed. (SPIE, Bellingham, WA, 2000), Vol. 1, pp. 223–328.
40. M. B. Williams, P. R. Mangiafico, and P. U. Simoni, “Noise power spectra of images from digital mammography detectors,” Med. Phys. 26, 1279–1293 (1999).
41. P. R. Granfors and R. Aufrichtig, “Performance of a 41×41-cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications,” Med. Phys. 27, 1324–1331 (2000).
42. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU), “Medical imaging—The assessment of image quality” ICRU Report No. 54 (Bethesda, MD, USA, 1996)
44. M. Batentschuk, S. Neudert, M. Weidner, A. Osvet, L. Struye, J.-P. Tahon, and P. Leblans “Radiation stability of CsBr:Eu needle image plates,” J. Appl. Phys. 106, 083504 (2009).
45. J. M. Boone, T. R. Fewell, and R. J. Jennings, “Molybdenum, rhodium, and tungsten anode spectral models using interpolating polynomials with application to mammography,” Med. Phys. 24, 1863–1874 (1997).
46. P. Bernhardt, T. Mertelmeier, and M. Hoheisel, “X-ray spectrum optimization of full-field digital mammography: Simulation and phantom study,” Med. Phys. 33, 4337–4349 (2006).
48. R. Aufrichtig, “Comparison of low contrast detectability between a digital amorphous silicon and a screen-film based imaging system for thoracic radiography,” Med. Phys. 26, 1349–1358 (1999).
49. J. A. Segui and W. Zhao, “Amorphous selenium flat panel detectors for digital mammography: Validation of a NPWE model observer with CDMAM observer performance experiments,” Med. Phys. 33, 3711–3721 (2006).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month