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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11487848)

  • 21. Comparing image quality of flat-panel chest radiography with storage phosphor radiography and film-screen radiography.
    Ganten M; Radeleff B; Kampschulte A; Daniels MD; Kauffmann GW; Hansmann J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Jul; 181(1):171-6. PubMed ID: 12818852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Possibilities of dose reduction in lateral cephalometric radiographs and its effects on clinical diagnostics.
    Kaeppler G; Dietz K; Reinert S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Jan; 36(1):39-44. PubMed ID: 17329587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Evaluation of radiographic image quality parameters obtained with the REX simulator.
    Magalhaes LA; Drexler GG; deAlmeida CE
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Nov; 147(4):614-8. PubMed ID: 21273198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Digital radiography: image quality and radiation dose.
    Seibert JA
    Health Phys; 2008 Nov; 95(5):586-98. PubMed ID: 18849693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. On the dynamic range of different X-ray photon detectors in intra-oral radiography. A comparison of image quality in film, charge-coupled device and storage phosphor systems.
    Borg E; Gröndahl HG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1996 Apr; 25(2):82-8. PubMed ID: 9446978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. [Digital storage phosphor radiography. Doses and image quality].
    Salvini E; Pedroli G; Montanari G; Pastori R; Crespi A; Zincone G
    Radiol Med; 1994 Jun; 87(6):847-51. PubMed ID: 8041940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Image enhancer-television equipment--image quality and dose].
    Larwin K
    Strahlenschutz Forsch Prax; 1986; 27():43-7. PubMed ID: 3705125
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Use of a quality index in threshold contrast detail detection measurements in television fluoroscopy.
    Gallacher DJ; Mackenzie A; Batchelor S; Lynch J; Saunders JE
    Br J Radiol; 2003 Jul; 76(907):464-72. PubMed ID: 12857706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [Digital thoracic radiography--a comparison of digital and analog imaging techniques].
    Busch HP
    Bildgebung; 1991; 58 Suppl 1():9-12. PubMed ID: 1799858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Screen-film versus digital radiography of sacroiliac joints: evaluation of image quality and dose to patients.
    Jablanovic D; Ciraj-Bjelac O; Damjanov N; Seric S; Radak-Perovic M; Arandjic D; Maksimovic R
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Jun; 155(1):88-95. PubMed ID: 23185070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD).
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Wenkel E; Bautz W
    Rontgenpraxis; 2001; 54(4):123-6. PubMed ID: 11883115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Dose efficiency of screen-film systems used in pediatric radiography.
    Cohen G; Wagner LK; McDaniel DL; Robinson LH
    Radiology; 1984 Jul; 152(1):187-93. PubMed ID: 6729110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Radiation dose and image quality in diagnostic radiology. Optimization of the dose-image quality relationship with clinical experience from scoliosis radiography, coronary intervention and a flat-panel digital detector.
    Geijer H
    Acta Radiol Suppl; 2002 Mar; 43(427):1-43. PubMed ID: 12108231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Follow up of total hip prothesis: storage phosphor versus screen-film radiography].
    Polet K; de La Selle H; Leroux J; Ludig T; Girard F; Coudane H; Blum A
    J Radiol; 2003 Mar; 84(3):299-303. PubMed ID: 12736588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. [Detectability of pulmonary coin lesions: a comparative assessment of the image quality of a storage phosphor system and a conventional film screen system].
    Hofmann-Preiss K; Reichler B; Friedel N; Seyferth W
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1993 May; 3(3):152-5. PubMed ID: 8518304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Short communication: use of the European image quality criteria for screen-film comparison--application for asymmetric systems.
    Guibelalde E; Morillo A; Fernandez JM; Vañó E
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Jan; 69(817):64-9. PubMed ID: 8785624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Compatibility characteristics of five radiographic films utilised in Brazilian diagnostic radiology.
    Magalhaes LA; Drexler GG; de Almeida CE
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Sep; 156(2):184-9. PubMed ID: 23651656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Managing patient dose in digital radiology. A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
    International Commission on Radiological Protection
    Ann ICRP; 2004; 34(1):1-73. PubMed ID: 15302167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Radiographic mottle and patient exposure in mammography.
    Barnes GT; Chakraborty DP
    Radiology; 1982 Dec; 145(3):815-21. PubMed ID: 7146416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.