126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10808219)
1. 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]
2. Subjective image quality of solid-state and photostimulable phosphor systems for digital intra-oral radiography.
Borg E; Attaelmanan A; Gröndahl HG
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Mar; 29(2):70-5. PubMed ID: 10808218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparative study of two digital radiographic storage phosphor systems.
Oliveira AE; de Almeida SM; Paganini GA; Haiter Neto F; Bóscolo FN
Braz Dent J; 2000; 11(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 11210259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Physical properties of a photostimulable phosphor system for intra-oral radiography.
Stamatakis HC; Welander U; McDavid WD
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jan; 29(1):28-34. PubMed ID: 10654033
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Comparison of three intra-oral storage phosphor systems using subjective image quality.
Kitagawa H; Farman AG; Scheetz JP; Brown WP; Lewis J; Benefiel M; Kuroyanagi K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Sep; 29(5):272-6. PubMed ID: 10980561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Dose response of a storage phosphor system for intraoral radiography.
Stamatakis HC; Welander U; McDavid WD
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Sep; 28(5):272-6. PubMed ID: 10490744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. RVG-ui: a sensor to rival direct-exposure intra-oral x-ray film.
Farman AG; Farman TT
Int J Comput Dent; 1999 Jul; 2(3):183-96. PubMed ID: 11351483
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Comparison of observer performance in determining the position of endodontic files with physical measures in the evaluation of dental X-ray imaging systems.
Vandre RH; Pajak JC; Abdel-Nabi H; Farman TT; Farman AG
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jul; 29(4):216-22. PubMed ID: 10918454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. A comparison of older and newer versions of intraoral digital radiography systems: diagnosing noncavitated proximal carious lesions.
Haiter-Neto F; dos Anjos Pontual A; Frydenberg M; Wenzel A
J Am Dent Assoc; 2007 Oct; 138(10):1353-9; quiz 1382-3. PubMed ID: 17908850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of complementary metal oxide semiconductor and charge-coupled device intraoral X-ray detectors using subjective image quality.
Kitagawa H; Scheetz JP; Farman AG
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Nov; 32(6):408-11. PubMed ID: 15070845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Effects of different exposure values on diagnostic accuracy of digital images.
Pfeiffer P; Schmage P; Nergiz I; Platzer U
Quintessence Int; 2000 Apr; 31(4):257-60. PubMed ID: 11203933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Image-receptor performance: a comparison of Trophy RVG UI sensor and Kodak Ektaspeed Plus film.
Ludlow J; Mol A
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Jan; 91(1):109-19. PubMed ID: 11174581
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A comparative study of image quality and radiation exposure for dental radiographs produced using a charge-coupled device and a phosphor plate system.
Farrier SL; Drage NA; Newcombe RG; Hayes SJ; Dummer PM
Int Endod J; 2009 Oct; 42(10):900-7. PubMed ID: 19548931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Signal-to-noise ratios of 6 intraoral digital sensors.
Attaelmanan AG; Borg E; Gröndahl HG
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 May; 91(5):611-5. PubMed ID: 11346743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Perceptibility curve test for digital radiographs before and after application of various image processing algorithms.
Alpöz E; Soğur E; Baksi Akdeniz BG
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):490-4. PubMed ID: 18033946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of image quality parameters of representative intraoral digital radiographic systems.
Udupa H; Mah P; Dove SB; McDavid WD
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2013 Dec; 116(6):774-83. PubMed ID: 24237729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
