Free Access
Volume 59, Number 2, April - June
Page(s) 104 - 110
Published online 03 June 2024
  • Aliasgharzadeh A, Moradi H, Talakesh T, Motallebzadeh E, Ataei G, Borujeni MH, et al. 2021. Mean glandular dose measurement in three mammography centers in Kashan: An approach to provide a local DRL. Front Biomed Technolog 8: 285–291. [Google Scholar]
  • Al Naemi H, Aly A, Omar AJ, AlObadli A, Ciraj-Bjelac O, Kharita MH, et al. 2020. Evaluation of radiation dose for patients undergoing mammography in Qatar. Radiat Protect Dosimetry 189: 354–361. [Google Scholar]
  • Applegate KE, Findlay Ú, Fraser L, Kinsella Y, Ainsbury L, Bouffler S. 2023. Radiation exposures in pregnancy, health effects and risks to the embryo/foetus-information to inform the medical management of the pregnant patient. J Radiolog Protect. [Google Scholar]
  • Bertho JM, Bourguignon M. 2023. La relation linéaire sans seuil (LNT) et l’évolution du système de radioprotection. The linear non threshold (LNT) relationship and the evolution of the radiological protection system. Radioprotection 58: 241–242. [Google Scholar]
  • Dance DR, Skinner CL, Young KC. 2000. ‘Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol. Phys Med Biol Phys Med Biol 45: 3225–3240. [Google Scholar]
  • ICRP 2007. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37 (2-4). [Google Scholar]
  • Jamal N, Ng KH, McLean D. 2003. A study of mean glandular dose during diagnostic mammography in Malaysia and some of the factors affecting it. Br J Radiol 76: 238–245. [Google Scholar]
  • Khalis M, El Rhazi K, Haida Charaka H, Chajès V, Rinaldi S, Nejjari C, et al. 2016. Female breast cancer incidence and mortality in Morocco: comparison with other countries. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 17: 5211–5216. [Google Scholar]
  • Laurier D, Billarand Y, Klokov D, Leuraud K. 2023a. The scientific basis for the use of the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) model in radiological protection. J Radiol Prot 43. [Google Scholar]
  • Laurier L, Billarand Y, Klokov D, Leuraud K. 2023b. Fondements scientifiques de l’utilisation du modèle linéaire sans seuil (LNT) aux faibles doses et débits de dose en radioprotection. Radioprotection 58: 243–260. [Google Scholar]
  • Lekatou A, Metaxas V, Messaris G, Antzele P, Tzavellas G, Panayiotakis G. 2019. Institutional breast doses in digital mammography. Radiat Protect Dosim 185: 239–251. [Google Scholar]
  • Ministère de la Santé du Maroc. 2011. ‘Guide de détection précoce des cancers du sein et du col de l ’utérus’, pp. 18–25. Available at:étection_precoce_des_cancers_du_sein_et_du_col_de_l’uterus.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • Perry N, Broeders M, Wolf C de, Törnberg S, Holland R, von Karsa L. 2008. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition-summary document. Ann Oncol 19: 614–622. [Google Scholar]
  • Sá dos Reis C, Fartaria MJ, Garcia Alves JH, Pascoal A. 2018. Portuguese study of mean glandular dose in mammography and comparison with European references. Radiat Protect Dosim 179: 391–399. [Google Scholar]
  • Seimenis I, Chouchos K, Prassopoulos P. 2018 Radiation risk associated with X-ray mammography screening: communication and exchange of information via tweets. J Am Coll Radiol 15: 1033–1039. [Google Scholar]
  • Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. 2018 ‘Cancer statistics, 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 68: 7–30. [Google Scholar]
  • Smans K, Bosmans H, Xiao M, Carton AK, Marchal G. 2005. Towards a proposition of a diagnostic (dose) reference level for mammographic acquisitions in breast screening measurements in Belgium’, Radiation protection dosimetry. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 117: 321–326. [Google Scholar]
  • Tahiri Z, Mkimel M, Jroundi L, Laamrani FZ. (2021) Evaluation of radiation doses and estimation of the risk of radiation-induced carcinogenesis in women undergoing screening mammography examinations. Biomed Pharmacol J 14: 249–255. [Google Scholar]
  • Tahiri Z, Talbi M, El Mansouri M, Sekkat H, Mkimel M, Nhila O. 2022. Evaluation of Moroccan physician ’ s knowledge about radiation doses and risks from pediatric computed tomography, pp. 0–3. [Google Scholar]
  • Talbi M, Khalis M, Sebihi R, Nhila O, EL Mansouri M, Chakir E, et al. 2021. Analysis of half-value layer and average glandular dose for mammography using gate. Moscow Univ Phys Bull 76: S95– S102. [Google Scholar]
  • Talbi M, El Mansouri M, Oustous A, Nhila O, Sebihi R, Khalis M. 2021. Validation of X-ray spectra in screening mammography simulated with Monte Carlo’. Moscow Univ Phys Bull 76: S30– S35. [Google Scholar]
  • Talbi M, El Mansouri M, Oustous A, Tahiri Z, Eddaoui K, Khalis M. 2022. ‘Local diagnostic reference levels (LDRLs) for full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) procedures in Morocco’. J Med Imag Radiat Sci 53: 242–247. [Google Scholar]
  • Wang FL, Chen F, Yin H, Xu N, Wu XX, Ma JJ, et al. 2013. Effects of age, breast density and volume on breast cancer diagnosis: a retrospective comparison of sensitivity of mammography and ultrasonography in China’s rural areas. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 14: 2277–2282. [Google Scholar]
  • Young KC, Burch A Oduko JM. 2005. Radiation doses received in the UK Breast Screening Programme in 2001 and 2002. Br J Radiol 78: 207–218. [Google Scholar]
  • Young KC, Oduko JM. 2016. Radiation doses received in the United Kingdom breast screening programme in 2010 to 2012. Br J Radiol 89: 20150831. [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.