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 *

146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11797944)

  • 1. Comparison of light and x-ray sensitometric responses of double-emulsion films for different processing conditions.
    Blendl C; Buhr E
    Med Phys; 2001 Dec; 28(12):2420-6. PubMed ID: 11797944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Method of simulated screen sensitometry for asymmetric, low crossover medical x-ray films.
    Dickerson RE; Haus AG; Baker CW
    Med Phys; 1994 Apr; 21(4):525-8. PubMed ID: 8058018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Problems associated with simulated light sensitometry for low-crossover medical x-ray films.
    Haus AG; Dickerson RE
    Med Phys; 1990; 17(4):691-5. PubMed ID: 2215416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sensitometric responses of selected medical radiographic films.
    Kofler JM; Gray JE
    Radiology; 1991 Dec; 181(3):879-83. PubMed ID: 1947114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Using light sensitometry to evaluate mammography film performance.
    West MS; Spelic DC
    Med Phys; 2000 May; 27(5):854-60. PubMed ID: 10841387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [The influence of the spectrum and the type of exposure on the contrast of double-sided coated x-ray film].
    Blendl C; Bollen R; Freytag KH
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1992 Nov; 2(6):339-44. PubMed ID: 1457475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A time-scale sensitometric method for evaluating screen-film systems.
    Góes EG; Pelá CA; Ghilardi NT
    Phys Med Biol; 1997 Oct; 42(10):1939-46. PubMed ID: 9364589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Variation of the sensitometric characteristics of seven mammographic films with processing conditions.
    Tsalafoutas IA; Dimakopoulou AD; Koulentianos ED; Serefoglou AN; Yakoumakis EN
    Br J Radiol; 2004 Aug; 77(920):666-71. PubMed ID: 15326045
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A comparison of five methods for monitoring the precision of automated x-ray film processors.
    Nickoloff EL; Leo F; Reese M
    Radiology; 1978 Nov; 129(2):509-14. PubMed ID: 704868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Mammography film processor replenishment rate: bromide level monitoring.
    Kimme-Smith C; Wuelfing P; Kitts EL; Cagnon C; Basic M; Bassett L
    Med Phys; 1997 Mar; 24(3):369-72. PubMed ID: 9089588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [A comparison of various methods of x-ray sensitometry].
    Maslov LA; Gurvich AM; Chikirdin EG; Il'ina MA; Popova TA
    Med Tekh; 1988; (5):36-41. PubMed ID: 3200152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Automatic processing: effects of temperature and time changes on the sensitometric properties of light-sensitive films.
    Thunthy KH; Hashimoto K; Weinberg R
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Jul; 72(1):112-8. PubMed ID: 1891230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [The sensitometric recording of verification films in high-volt therapy].
    Proske H; Steinkamp P
    Strahlenther Onkol; 1992 Jan; 168(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 1734587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography.
    Dimakopoulou AD; Tsalafoutas IA; Georgiou EK; Yakoumakis EN
    Br J Radiol; 2006 Feb; 79(938):123-9. PubMed ID: 16489193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sensitometric evaluation of some mammographic film-screen combinations.
    McLean D
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1991 Sep; 14(3):157-62. PubMed ID: 1953502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Variation of sensitometric curves of radiographic films in high energy photon beams.
    Danciu C; Proimos BS; Rosenwald JC; Mijnheer BJ
    Med Phys; 2001 Jun; 28(6):966-74. PubMed ID: 11439493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of developer temperature changes on the sensitometric properties of direct exposure and screen-film imaging systems.
    Kircos LT; Staninec M; Chou LS
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1989 Feb; 18(1):11-4. PubMed ID: 2599232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The influence of film processing temperature and time on mammographic image quality.
    Brink C; de Villiers JF; Lötter MG; van Zyl M
    Br J Radiol; 1993 Aug; 66(788):685-90. PubMed ID: 7719681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A sensitometric comparison of Fuji Super HR-G and Kodak T-mat G panoramic films.
    Benson BW; Frederiksen NL
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 May; 79(5):646-8. PubMed ID: 7600231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of developer exhaustion on the sensitometric properties of four dental films.
    Syriopoulos K; Velders XL; Sanderink GC; van Ginkel FC; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Mar; 28(2):80-8. PubMed ID: 10522196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.