Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Filters

R E Hendrick

Showing results (41-50 of 48) with videos related to

Pageof 5
Sort By:
You have reached the last page of results.This site can display upto 48 results.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology|December 1, 1987
Contrast optimization for the detection of focal hepatic lesions by MR imaging at 1.5 TW D Foley, J B Kneeland, J D Cates, et al.
Radiology|May 1, 1989
Short TI inversion-recovery imaging of the liver: pulse-sequence optimization and comparison with spin-echo imagingM Dousset, R Weissleder, R E Hendrick, et al.
Radiology|March 7, 2001
Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinationsJ M Lewin, R E Hendrick, C J D'Orsi, et al.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology|April 20, 2001
Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic settingL A Venta, R E Hendrick, Y T Adler, et al.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology|July 2, 1998
American College of Radiology guidelines for breast cancer screeningS A Feig, C J D'Orsi, R E Hendrick, et al.
Medical Physics|April 11, 2000
Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototypeS Vedantham, A Karellas, S Suryanarayanan, et al.
Academic Radiology|April 15, 2000
Current status of full-field digital mammographyE D Pisano, M J Yaffe, B M Hemminger, et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology|March 18, 1999
Risk of risk-based mammography screening, ages 40 to 49. American College of Radiology Task Force on Breast CancerL W Bassett, G Cardenosa, C J D'Orsi, et al.
Pageof 5

Showing results (41-50 of 48) with videos related to

Sort By:
Pageof 5
You have reached the last page of results.This site can display upto 48 results.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology|December 1, 1987
Contrast optimization for the detection of focal hepatic lesions by MR imaging at 1.5 TW D Foley, J B Kneeland, J D Cates, et al.
Radiology|May 1, 1989
Short TI inversion-recovery imaging of the liver: pulse-sequence optimization and comparison with spin-echo imagingM Dousset, R Weissleder, R E Hendrick, et al.
Radiology|March 7, 2001
Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4,945 paired examinationsJ M Lewin, R E Hendrick, C J D'Orsi, et al.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology|April 20, 2001
Rates and causes of disagreement in interpretation of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography in a diagnostic settingL A Venta, R E Hendrick, Y T Adler, et al.
AJR. American Journal of Roentgenology|July 2, 1998
American College of Radiology guidelines for breast cancer screeningS A Feig, C J D'Orsi, R E Hendrick, et al.
Medical Physics|April 11, 2000
Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototypeS Vedantham, A Karellas, S Suryanarayanan, et al.
Academic Radiology|April 15, 2000
Current status of full-field digital mammographyE D Pisano, M J Yaffe, B M Hemminger, et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology|March 18, 1999
Risk of risk-based mammography screening, ages 40 to 49. American College of Radiology Task Force on Breast CancerL W Bassett, G Cardenosa, C J D'Orsi, et al.
Pageof 5