Free Access
Volume 51, Number 1, January-March 2016
Page(s) 51 - 58
Published online 28 March 2016
  • Al-Senan R.M. et al. (2011) Characteristics of an OSLD in the diagnostic energy range, Med. Phys. 38, 4396-4405. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Andersen C.E. et al. (2009) Characterization of a fiber-coupled Al2O3:C luminescence dosimetry system for online in vivo dose verification during 192Ir brachytherapy, Med. Phys. 36, 708-718. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Andersson I. (1986) Mammography in clinical practice. Eastman Kodak Company, Rochester. [Google Scholar]
  • Aznar M.C. et al. (2005) A Monte Carlo study of the energy dependence of Al2O3:C crystals for the real-time in vivo dosimetry in mammography, Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 114, 444-449. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Boone J.M. et al. (2001) Dedicated breast CT: radiation dose and image quality evaluation, Radiology 221, 657-667. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Chen B. et al. (2012) Analysis of patient dose in full field digital mammography, Eur. J. Radiol. 81, 868-872. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dance D.R. (1990) Monte-carlo calculation of conversion factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose, Phys. Med. Biol. 35, 1211-1219. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Dance D.R. et al. (1999) Breast dosimetry, Appl. Radiat. Isotopes 50, 185-203. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dance D.R. et al. (2000) Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol, Phys. Med. Biol. 45, 3225-3240. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Edwards C.R. et al. (2005) The low energy X-ray response of the LiF:Mg:Cu:P thermoluminescent dosemeter: a comparison with LiF:Mg:Ti, Br. J. Radiol. 78, 543-547. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • US Dpt of Health and Human Services, Bassett L.W. (1995) High quality mammography: information for referring providers, Breast J. 1, 331-332. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Huang S. et al. (2008) The effect of skin thickness determined using breast CT on mammographic dosimetry, Med. Phys. 35, 1199-1207. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • IAEA (2007) Dosimetry in diagnostic radiology: an international code practice, Technical reports series no. 457. IAEA, Vienna, pp. 155-187. [Google Scholar]
  • Jursinic P.A. (2007) Characterization of optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters, OSLDs, for clinical dosimetric measurements, Med. Phys. 34, 4594-4604. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Jursinic P.A. (2010) Changes in optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter (OSLD) dosimetric characteristics with accumulated dose, Med. Phys. 37, 132-140. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lavoie L. et al. (2011) Characterization of a commercially-available, optically-stimulated luminescent dosimetry system for use in computed tomography, Health Phys. 101, 299-310. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Oliveira B.B. et al. (2014) Mean glandular dose for different angles of the X-ray tube using different glandularity phantoms, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 95, 202-204. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Oliveira M. et al. (2007) Average glandular dose and phantom image quality in mammography, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 580, 574-577. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Perks C.A. et al.(2007) Medical dosimetry using Optically Stimulated Luminescence dots and microStar readers. In: Proceedings of the 12th Congress of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA12), pp. 1-10. IAEA. [Google Scholar]
  • Poliei S.R. et al. (1987) Occult breast cancer; prevalence and radiographic detectability, Radiology 163, 459-462. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Tsai H.Y. et al. (2010) Evaluation of depth dose and glandular dose for digital mammography, Radiat. Meas. 45, 726-728. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Viamonte L.A.R. et al. (2008) Radiotherapy dosimetry using a commercial OSL system, Med. Phys. 35, 1261-1266. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Vinnicombe S. et al. (2009) Full-field digital versus screen-film mammography: comparison within the U.K. breast screening program and systematic review of published data, Radiology 251, 347-358. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Young K.C. (2002) Radiation doses in UK trial of breast screening in women aged 40-48 years, Br. J. Radiol. 75, 362-370. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yukihara E.G. et al. (2008) Optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dosimetry in medicine, Phys. Med. Biol. 53, R351-R379. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yusuf M. et al. (2014) Characterization of the Optically Stimulated Luminescence nanoDot for CT Dosimetry, Life Sci. J. 11, 445-450. [Google Scholar]
  • Zoetelief J. et al. (1996) European protocol on dosimetry in mammography, Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 80, 191-193. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.