Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Eklund, G. W.
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Eklund, G. W.
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, W.

Radiology, Vol 190, 297-307, Copyright © 1994 by Radiological Society of North America

REVIEWS

Assessing adequacy of mammographic image quality

GW Eklund, G Cardenosa and W Parsons
Susan G. Komen Breast Center, Saint Francis Medical Center, Peoria, IL 60614.

High-quality mammographic images enhance the radiologist's ability to interpret mammograms with high sensitivity for detecting abnormalities and high specificity for classifying lesions suspicious for malignancy. In addition to proper exposure, contrast, resolution, compression, and positioning, high-quality mammographic images must be accompanied by pertinent history and available comparison images. To avoid negating the benefits of technically ideal images, mammograms must be viewed under optimal viewing conditions. Constant attention to quality control, with every image evaluated for adherence to strict technical standards, is essential for maintaining image quality.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 radtechHome page
J. MINIGH
Mammographic Film Artifacts.
Radiol. Technol., May 1, 2006; 77(5): 389M - 402M.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
S. H. Taplin, C. M. Rutter, C. Finder, M. T. Mandelson, F. Houn, and E. White
Screening Mammography: Clinical Image Quality and the Risk of Interval Breast Cancer
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2002; 178(4): 797 - 803.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 RadiologyHome page
F. Sardanelli, F. Zandrino, A. Imperiale, E. Bonaldo, M. G. Quartini, and N. Cogorno
Breast Biphasic Compression versus Standard Monophasic Compression in X-ray Mammography
Radiology, November 1, 2000; 217(2): 576 - 580.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
J. P. Hogge, C. H. Palmer, C. C. Muller, S. T. Little, D. C. Smith, P. P. Fatouros, and E. S. de Paredes
Quality Assurance in Mammography: Artifact Analysis
RadioGraphics, March 1, 1999; 19(2): 503 - 522.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1994 by the Radiological Society of North America.