These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

83 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10578191)

  • 1. Dependency of dose response of five charge-coupled device-based digital intra-oral radiographic systems on tube voltage.
    Nishikawa K; Shibuya H; Wakoh M; Kuroyanagi K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Nov; 28(6):364-7. PubMed ID: 10578191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The perceptibility curve test applied to direct digital dental radiography.
    Yoshiura K; Stamatakis H; Shi XQ; Welander U; McDavid WD; Kristoffersen J; Tronje G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 May; 27(3):131-5. PubMed ID: 9693524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Intraoral radiology in general dental practices - a comparison of digital and film-based X-ray systems with regard to radiation protection and dose reduction.
    Anissi HD; Geibel MA
    Rofo; 2014 Aug; 186(8):762-7. PubMed ID: 24648236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Optical densities of dental resin composites: a comparison of CCD, storage phosphor, and Ektaspeed plus radiographic film.
    Farman TT; Farman AG; Scarfe WC; Goldsmith LJ
    Gen Dent; 1996; 44(6):532-7. PubMed ID: 9515395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sens-A-Ray characteristics with variations in beam quality.
    Harada T; Nishikawa K; Shibuya H; Hayakawa Y; Kuroyanagi K
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 Jul; 80(1):120-3. PubMed ID: 7552852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiation dosage reduction in general dental practice using digital intraoral radiographic systems.
    Hayakawa Y; Shibuya H; Ota Y; Kuroyanagi K
    Bull Tokyo Dent Coll; 1997 Feb; 38(1):21-5. PubMed ID: 9566150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Performance evaluation and testing of digital intra-oral radiographic systems.
    Doyle P; Finney L
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):313-7. PubMed ID: 16461488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Sensitometric response of the Sens-A-Ray, a charge-coupled imaging device, to changes in beam energy.
    Goshima T; Goshima Y; Scarfe WC; Farman AG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1996 Jan; 25(1):17-8. PubMed ID: 9084280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Conventional and predicted perceptibility curves for contrast-enhanced direct digital intraoral radiographs.
    Yoshiura K; Welander U; Shi XQ; Li G; Kawazu T; Tatsumi M; Okamura K; McDavid WD; Kanda S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 Jul; 30(4):219-25. PubMed ID: 11681484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An objective comparison of four digital intra-oral radiographic systems: sensitometric properties and resolution.
    Araki K; Endo A; Okano T
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Mar; 29(2):76-80. PubMed ID: 10808219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effect of beam energy and filtration on the signal-to-noise ratio of the Dexis intraoral X-ray detector.
    Kitagawa H; Farman AG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Jan; 33(1):21-4. PubMed ID: 15140818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Reduction of radiation dosage by the use of newer reinforced rare earth films].
    Hofmann T
    Inf Orthod Kieferorthop; 1987; 19(1):107-10. PubMed ID: 3474210
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Optimum exposure ranges for computed dental radiography.
    Hayakawa Y; Farman AG; Scarfe WC; Kuroyanagi K; Rumack PM; Schick DB
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1996 Apr; 25(2):71-5. PubMed ID: 9446976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical comparison of high-speed rare-earth screen and par-speed screen for diagnostic efficacy and radiation dosage.
    Robinson T; Becker JA; Olson AP
    Radiology; 1982 Oct; 145(1):214-6. PubMed ID: 6821592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography.
    Bacher K; Smeets P; Bonnarens K; De Hauwere A; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Oct; 181(4):923-9. PubMed ID: 14500203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Correction of background noise in direct digital dental radiography.
    Yoshioka T; Kobayashi C; Suda H; Sasaki T
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1996 Nov; 25(5):256-62. PubMed ID: 9161179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Chest radiography: a comparison of image quality and effective dose using four digital systems.
    Pascoal A; Lawinski CP; Mackenzie A; Tabakov S; Lewis CA
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):273-7. PubMed ID: 15933121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Absolute measures of image quality for the Sens-A-Ray direct digital intraoral radiography system.
    Welander U; McDavid WD; Mörner AC; Tronje G; Tokuoka O; Fuchihata H; Nelvig P; Dove SB
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 Sep; 80(3):345-50. PubMed ID: 7489279
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An optimisation strategy in a digital environment applied to neonatal chest imaging.
    Hansson J; Båth M; Håkansson M; Grundin H; Bjurklint E; Orvestad P; Kjellström A; Boström H; Jönsson M; Jonsson K; Månsson LG
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):278-85. PubMed ID: 15933122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Retrospective patient dose analysis of a digital radiography system in routine clinical use.
    Schuncke A; Neitzel U
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):131-4. PubMed ID: 15933094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.