Mammography in the 1990s: The United States and Canada

Radiology

Volumn 210, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 345-351

  Suleiman, Orhan H ^a   Spelic, David C ^a   McCrohan, John L ^a   Symonds, Gordon R ^b   Houn, Florence ^a  

^a CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

^b HEALTH CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Breast radiography, quality assurance; Quality assurance

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT REDUCTION; CANADA; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; SCORING SYSTEM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0032902270     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiology.210.2.r99fe45345     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Conway BJ, Suleiman OH, Rueter FG, Antonsen RG, Slayton RJ. National survey of mammographic facilities in 1985, 1988, and 1992. Radiology 1994; 191:323-330.
2. Conway BJ, McCrohan JL, Rueter FG, Suleiman OH. Mammography in the eighties. Radiology 1990; 177:335-339.
3. Department of Health, Canada. National survey of Canadian mammographic facilities. Ottawa, Canada: Minister of Public Works and Government Services, 1997.
4. Suleiman OH, Conway BJ, Rueter FG, Slayton RJ. Automatic film processing: analysis of 9 years of observations. Radiology 1992; 185:25-28.
5. Suleiman OH, Rueter FG, Antonsen RG, Conway BJ, Slayton RJ. The sensitometric technique for the evaluation of processing (STEP). Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 1993; 49:105-106.
6. Suleiman OH, Showalter CK, Gross RE, Bunge RE. Radiographic film fog in the darkroom. Radiology 1984; 151:237-238.
7. Nationwide evaluation in x-ray trends (NEXT) tabulation and graphical summary of 1988 mammography survey. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Publication no. 90-7. Frankfort, KY: Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, 1990.
8. Nationwide evaluation in x-ray trends (NEXT) tabulation and graphical summary of surveys 1984 through 1987. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Publication no. 89-3. Frankfort, KY: Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, 1989.
9. Nationwide evaluation in x-ray trends (NEXT) tabulation and graphical summary of 1992 mammography survey. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Publication no. 95-2. Frankfort, KY: Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, 1994.
10. Nationwide evaluation in x-ray trends (NEXT) tabulation and graphical summary of 1991 fluoroscopy survey. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Publication no. 94-2. Frankfort, KY: Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, 1994.
11. Nationwide evaluation in x-ray trends (NEXT) tabulation and graphical summary of 1993 dental survey. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Publication no. 96-3. Frankfort, KY: Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, 1995.
12. Nationwide evaluation in x-ray trends (NEXT) tabulation and graphical summary of 1994 chest survey. Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors Publication no. 98-2. Frankfort, KY: Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, 1998.
13. Spelic D, Suleiman OH, Fuller R, et al. Image quality in mammography: what is the optimal film density? (abstr). Radiology 1995; 197:626.
14. Young KC, Wallis MG, Blanks RG, Moss SM. Influence of number of views and mammographic film density on the detection of invasive cancers: results from the NHS breast screening programme. Br J Radiol 1997; 70:482-488.
15. Young KC, Wallis MG, Ramsdale ML. Mammographic film density and detection of small breast cancers. Clin Radiol 1994; 49:461-464.
16. American College of Radiology. Mammography quality control manual. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 1992.
17. Can the quality of mammography in Canada be improved? Report of the consultation on the results of the national survey of Canadian mammography facilities. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: International Radiation Protection Agency, February 4-5, 1998.