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 *

168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11487849)

  • 41. Segmented crystalline scintillators: an initial investigation of high quantum efficiency detectors for megavoltage x-ray imaging.
    Sawant A; Antonuk LE; El-Mohri Y; Zhao Q; Li Y; Su Z; Wang Y; Yamamoto J; Du H; Cunningham I; Klugerman M; Shah K
    Med Phys; 2005 Oct; 32(10):3067-83. PubMed ID: 16279059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Considerations for selecting a digital radiography system.
    Morin RL; Seibert JA
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2005 Mar; 2(3):287-90. PubMed ID: 17411815
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. [Thoracic radiographs with the AMBER system. A comparison of the diagnostic image quality of film-screen and storage-phosphor radiographs on the grid-partition stand and the AMBER system].
    Busch HP; Hartmann J; Freund MC; Lehmann KJ; Georgi M; Richter K
    Rofo; 1992 Mar; 156(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 1550921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Developments in digital radiography: an equipment update.
    James JJ; Davies AG; Cowen AR; O'Connor PJ
    Eur Radiol; 2001; 11(12):2616-26. PubMed ID: 11734969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Imaging performance with different doses in skeletal radiography: comparison of a needle-structured and a conventional storage phosphor system with a flat-panel detector.
    Wirth S; Treitl M; Reiser MF; Körner M
    Radiology; 2009 Jan; 250(1):152-60. PubMed ID: 19001150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Use of a simple Leeds test object for rapid assessment of image intensifiers.
    Grant AM; Kehoe TM; Law J
    Br J Radiol; 1987 Oct; 60(718):1019-21. PubMed ID: 3676644
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Absorption and noise in cesium iodide x-ray image intensifiers.
    Rowlands JA; Taylor KW
    Med Phys; 1983; 10(6):786-95. PubMed ID: 6656692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Quantitative assessment of a new dental imaging system.
    Walker A; Horner K; Czajka J; Shearer AC; Wilson NH
    Br J Radiol; 1991 Jun; 64(762):529-36. PubMed ID: 2070184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Dose performance evaluation of a charge coupled device and a flat-panel digital fluoroscopy system recently installed in an interventional cardiology laboratory.
    Tsapaki V; Kottou S; Kollaros N; Dafnomili P; Kyriakidis Z; Neofotistou V
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2004; 111(3):297-304. PubMed ID: 15266080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Clinical aspects of quality criteria in digital radiography.
    Vetter S; Strecker EP
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2001; 94(1-2):33-6. PubMed ID: 11487839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Physical and clinical evaluation of a 2,048 x 2,048-matrix image intensifier TV digital imaging system in bone radiography.
    Higashida Y; Baba Y; Hatemura M; Yoshida A; Takada T; Takahashi M
    Acad Radiol; 1996 Oct; 3(10):842-8. PubMed ID: 8923903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. 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]  

  • 53. Absorbed dose and image quality in examinations of the colon with digital and analogue techniques.
    Persliden J; Larsson P; Norén B; Wirell S
    Acta Radiol; 1997 Nov; 38(6):1010-4. PubMed ID: 9394659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. [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]  

  • 55. Detection of pulmonary edema in pigs: storage phosphor versus amorphous selenium-based flat-panel-detector radiography.
    Kim TS; Im JG; Goo JM; Lee KH; Lee YJ; Kim SH; Kim S
    Radiology; 2002 Jun; 223(3):695-701. PubMed ID: 12034937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. State-of-the-art digital radiography.
    Lee KR; Siegel EL; Templeton AW; Dwyer SJ; Murphey MD; Wetzel LH
    Radiographics; 1991 Nov; 11(6):1013-25; discussion 1026. PubMed ID: 1749846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. 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]  

  • 58. Quality of digital pre-implant tomography: comparison of film-screen images with storage phosphor images at normal and low dose.
    Ekestubbe A; Gröndahl HG; Molander B
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Sep; 32(5):322-6. PubMed ID: 14709608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Computed radiography: photostimulable phosphor image plate technology.
    Long BW
    Radiol Technol; 1989; 61(2):107-11. PubMed ID: 2587727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Balancing patient dose and image quality.
    Martin CJ; Sutton DG; Sharp PF
    Appl Radiat Isot; 1999 Jan; 50(1):1-19. PubMed ID: 10028625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.