168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11110932)
1. Comparison of doses for bedside examinations of the chest with conventional screen-film and computed radiography: results of a randomized controlled trial.
Weatherburn GC; Bryan S; Davies JG
Radiology; 2000 Dec; 217(3):707-12. PubMed ID: 11110932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Mottle on computed radiographs of the chest in pediatric patients.
Huda W; Slone RM; Belden CJ; Williams JL; Cumming WA; Palmer CK
Radiology; 1996 Apr; 199(1):249-52. PubMed ID: 8633153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Computed and conventional chest radiography: a comparison of image quality and radiation dose.
Ramli K; Abdullah BJ; Ng KH; Mahmud R; Hussain AF
Australas Radiol; 2005 Dec; 49(6):460-6. PubMed ID: 16351609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Productivity and cost assessment of computed radiography, digital radiography, and screen-film for outpatient chest examinations.
Andriole KP
J Digit Imaging; 2002 Sep; 15(3):161-9. PubMed ID: 12532253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Low-dose digital computed radiography in pediatric chest imaging.
Kogutt MS; Jones JP; Perkins DD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1988 Oct; 151(4):775-9. PubMed ID: 3262278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Digital chest radiography system with amorphous selenium flat-panel detectors: Qualitative and dosimetric comparison with a dedicated film-screen system.
Prato A; Ropolo R; Fava C
Radiol Med; 2005; 110(5-6):561-73. PubMed ID: 16437042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Digital radiography in paediatrics: radiation dose considerations and magnitude of possible dose reduction.
Hufton AP; Doyle SM; Carty HM
Br J Radiol; 1998 Feb; 71(842):186-99. PubMed ID: 9579183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Photostimulation plates or conventional films for bedside chest x-ray in pediatric radiology? A comparative study of quality of image and the dose delivered to patients].
Maccia C; Docou le Pointe H; Fery-Lemonnier E; Nadeau X; Montagne JP; Charpentier E; Ariche-Cohen M; Viens-Bitker C
J Radiol; 1996 Nov; 77(11):1129-34. PubMed ID: 9033870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Direct comparison of conventional and computed radiography with a dual-image recording technique.
MacMahon H; Sanada S; Doi K; Giger M; Xu XW; Yin FF; Montner SM; Carlin M
Radiographics; 1991 Mar; 11(2):259-68. PubMed ID: 2028063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Digital chest x-rays with a selenium detector: a prospective comparison with a conventional film-screen combination].
Freund M; Reuter M; Palmié S; Harder E; Hutzelmann A; Heller M
Rofo; 1997 Feb; 166(2):101-7. PubMed ID: 9116250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Detection of monitoring materials on bedside chest radiographs with the most recent generation of storage phosphor plates: dose increase does not improve detection performance.
Eisenhuber E; Stadler A; Prokop M; Fuchsjager M; Weber M; Schaefer-Prokop C
Radiology; 2003 Apr; 227(1):216-21. PubMed ID: 12668747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Portable chest imaging: comparison of storage phosphor digital, asymmetric screen-film, and conventional screen-film systems.
Niklason LT; Chan HP; Cascade PN; Chang CL; Chee PW; Mathews JF
Radiology; 1993 Feb; 186(2):387-93. PubMed ID: 8421740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Transition from screen-film to digital radiography: evolution of patient radiation doses at projection radiography.
Vaño E; Fernández JM; Ten JI; Prieto C; González L; Rodríguez R; de las Heras H
Radiology; 2007 May; 243(2):461-6. PubMed ID: 17356174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. AMBER chest radiography and patient dose measurements.
Persliden J; Fransson SG
Acta Radiol; 1995 Nov; 36(6):641-3. PubMed ID: 8519576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Accuracy of bedside chest hard-copy screen-film versus hard- and soft-copy computed radiographs in a medical intensive care unit: receiver operating characteristic analysis.
Kundel HL; Gefter W; Aronchick J; Miller W; Hatabu H; Whitfill CH; Miller W
Radiology; 1997 Dec; 205(3):859-63. PubMed ID: 9393548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [A study of entrance surface dose with CR and film/screen systems, and analysis of the X-ray conditions for chest radiography].
Mori T; Muto H
Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 2000 Dec; 60(14):863-7. PubMed ID: 11197837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Assessment of the problem: pediatric doses in screen-film and digital radiography.
Huda W
Pediatr Radiol; 2004 Oct; 34 Suppl 3():S173-82; discussion S234-41. PubMed ID: 15558259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [An economic comparison between digital luminescence radiography and conventional film processing in intensive care medicine].
Peters PE; Dykstra DE; Wiesmann W; Schlüchtermann J; Adam D
Radiologe; 1992 Nov; 32(11):536-40. PubMed ID: 1461981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of radiation doses to patients undergoing standard radiographic examinations with conventional screen-film radiography, computed radiography and direct digital radiography.
Compagnone G; Baleni MC; Pagan L; Calzolaio FL; Barozzi L; Bergamini C
Br J Radiol; 2006 Nov; 79(947):899-904. PubMed ID: 17065288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
