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 *

191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12033588)

  • 1. Measurement of the presampled two-dimensional modulation transfer function of digital imaging systems.
    Fetterly KA; Hangiandreou NJ; Schueler BA; Ritenour ER
    Med Phys; 2002 May; 29(5):913-21. PubMed ID: 12033588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of a simple method for deriving the presampled modulation transfer function of a digital radiographic system from an edge image.
    Buhr E; Günther-Kohfahl S; Neitzel U
    Med Phys; 2003 Sep; 30(9):2323-31. PubMed ID: 14528954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A method for determining the modulation transfer function from thick microwire profiles measured with x-ray microcomputed tomography.
    Nakaya Y; Kawata Y; Niki N; Umetatni K; Ohmatsu H; Moriyama N
    Med Phys; 2012 Jul; 39(7):4347-64. PubMed ID: 22830768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accurate MTF measurement in digital radiography using noise response.
    Kuhls-Gilcrist A; Jain A; Bednarek DR; Hoffmann KR; Rudin S
    Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):724-35. PubMed ID: 20229882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Estimation of the two-dimensional presampled modulation transfer function of digital radiography devices using one-dimensional test objects.
    Wells JR; Dobbins JT
    Med Phys; 2012 Oct; 39(10):6148-60. PubMed ID: 23039654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Intercomparison of methods for image quality characterization. I. Modulation transfer function.
    Samei E; Ranger NT; Dobbins JT; Chen Y
    Med Phys; 2006 May; 33(5):1454-65. PubMed ID: 16752580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Validation of MTF measurement for digital mammography quality control.
    Carton AK; Vandenbroucke D; Struye L; Maidment AD; Kao YH; Albert M; Bosmans H; Marchal G
    Med Phys; 2005 Jun; 32(6):1684-95. PubMed ID: 16013727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Experimental comparison of noise and resolution for 2k and 4k storage phosphor radiography systems.
    Flynn MJ; Samei E
    Med Phys; 1999 Aug; 26(8):1612-23. PubMed ID: 10501062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A method for measuring the presampled MTF of digital radiographic systems using an edge test device.
    Samei E; Flynn MJ; Reimann DA
    Med Phys; 1998 Jan; 25(1):102-13. PubMed ID: 9472832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Imaging properties of digital magnification radiography.
    Boyce SJ; Samei E
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):984-96. PubMed ID: 16696475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of edge analysis techniques for the determination of the MTF of digital radiographic systems.
    Samei E; Buhr E; Granfors P; Vandenbroucke D; Wang X
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Aug; 50(15):3613-25. PubMed ID: 16030386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Performance of a 41X41-cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications.
    Granfors PR; Aufrichtig R
    Med Phys; 2000 Jun; 27(6):1324-31. PubMed ID: 10902562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An effective method to verify line and point spread functions measured in computed tomography.
    Ohkubo M; Wada S; Matsumoto T; Nishizawa K
    Med Phys; 2006 Aug; 33(8):2757-64. PubMed ID: 16964851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Investigation of image quality identification utilizing physical image quality measurement in direct- and indirect-type of flat panel detectors and computed radiography].
    Yokoi T; Takata T; Ichikawa K
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2011; 67(11):1415-25. PubMed ID: 22104233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Measurements of system sharpness for two digital breast tomosynthesis systems.
    Marshall NW; Bosmans H
    Phys Med Biol; 2012 Nov; 57(22):7629-50. PubMed ID: 23123601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. An experimental comparison of detector performance for direct and indirect digital radiography systems.
    Samei E; Flynn MJ
    Med Phys; 2003 Apr; 30(4):608-22. PubMed ID: 12722813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Improving the accuracy of MTF measurement at low frequencies based on oversampled edge spread function deconvolution.
    Zhou Z; Gao F; Zhao H; Zhang L; Ren L; Li Z; Ghani MU; Hao T; Liu H
    J Xray Sci Technol; 2015; 23(4):517-29. PubMed ID: 26410662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Determination of the presampled MTF in computed tomography.
    Boone JM
    Med Phys; 2001 Mar; 28(3):356-60. PubMed ID: 11318317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Technical Note: An oversampling procedure to calculate the MTF of an imaging system from a bar-pattern image.
    González-López A; Campos-Morcillo PA; Lago-Martín JD
    Med Phys; 2016 Oct; 43(10):5653. PubMed ID: 27782684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Measurement of the presampling modulation transfer function of film digitizers using a curve fitting technique.
    Yin FF; Giger ML; Doi K
    Med Phys; 1990; 17(6):962-6. PubMed ID: 2280739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.