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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12076050)

  • 1. Impact of JPEG lossy image compression on quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
    Fidler A; Likar B; Pernus F; Skaleric U
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Mar; 31(2):106-12. PubMed ID: 12076050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparative evaluation of JPEG and JPEG2000 compression in quantitative digital subtraction radiography.
    Fidler A; Likar B; Pernus F; Skaleric U
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Nov; 31(6):379-84. PubMed ID: 12424637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A posteriori registration and subtraction of panoramic compared with intraoral radiography.
    Deserno TM; Rangarajan JR; Hoffmann J; Brägger U; Mericske-Stern R; Enkling N
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Aug; 108(2):e39-45. PubMed ID: 19615643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of conventional and TACT (Tuned Aperture Computed Tomography) digital subtraction radiography in detection of pericrestal bone-gain.
    Chai-U-Dom O; Ludlow JB; Tyndall DA; Webber RL
    J Periodontal Res; 2002 Apr; 37(2):147-53. PubMed ID: 12009184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Quantitative analysis of periodontal defects in a skull model by subtraction radiography using a digital imaging device.
    Young SJ; Chaibi MS; Graves DT; Majzoub Z; Boustany F; Cochran D; Nummikoski P
    J Periodontol; 1996 Aug; 67(8):763-9. PubMed ID: 8866315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effect of image content on detail preservation and file size reduction in lossy compression.
    Fidler A; Skaleric U; Likar B
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Oct; 36(7):387-92. PubMed ID: 17881596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Influence of developer exhaustion on accuracy of quantitative digital subtraction radiography: an in vitro study.
    Fidler A; Likar B; Pernus F; Skaleric U
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2000 Aug; 90(2):233-9. PubMed ID: 10936844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy in detecting bone lesions in vitro with conventional and subtracted direct digital imaging.
    Stassinakis A; Brägger U; Stojanovic M; Bürgin W; Lussi A; Lang NP
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Nov; 24(4):232-7. PubMed ID: 9161167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Interaction between noise and file compression and its effect on the recognition of caries in digital imaging.
    Janhom A; van der Stelt PF; van Ginkel FC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jan; 29(1):20-7. PubMed ID: 10654032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions.
    Gegler A; Mahl C; Fontanella V
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 Jan; 35(1):10-3. PubMed ID: 16421257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Fractal analysis of periapical bone from lossy compressed radiographs: a comparison of two lossy compression methods.
    Baksi BG; Fidler A
    J Digit Imaging; 2011 Dec; 24(6):993-8. PubMed ID: 21465294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The impact of image compression on diagnostic quality of digital images for detection of chemically-induced periapical lesions.
    Koenig L; Parks E; Analoui M; Eckert G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Jan; 33(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 15140821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A retrospective study of digital subtraction technique to detect sclerotic changes in alveolar bone on intraoral radiographs of bisphosphonate-treated patients.
    Zaman MU; Nakamoto T; Tanimoto K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(10):20130242. PubMed ID: 24404602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison between panoramic digital and digitized images to detect simulated periapical lesions using radiographic subtraction.
    Miguens SA; Veeck EB; Fontanella VR; da Costa NP
    J Endod; 2008 Dec; 34(12):1500-3. PubMed ID: 19026882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of changes in dental and bone radiographic densities in the presence of different soft-tissue simulators using pixel intensity and digital subtraction analyses.
    de Molon RS; Batitucci RG; Spin-Neto R; Paquier GM; Sakakura CE; Tosoni GM; Scaf G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(9):20130235. PubMed ID: 24005061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of bone chip orientation on quantitative estimates of changes in bone mass using digital subtraction radiography.
    Mol A; Dunn SM
    J Periodontal Res; 2003 Jun; 38(3):296-302. PubMed ID: 12753368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An in-vitro evaluation of a dental subtraction radiography system using bone chips on dried human mandibles.
    Rawlinson A; Ellwood RP; Davies RM
    J Clin Periodontol; 1999 Mar; 26(3):138-42. PubMed ID: 10100038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A comparison of two compression algorithms and the detection of caries.
    Janhom A; van der Stelt PF; Sanderink GC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Jul; 31(4):257-63. PubMed ID: 12087443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Quantitative digital subtraction radiography for the determination of small changes in bone thickness: an in vitro study.
    Christgau M; Hiller KA; Schmalz G; Kolbeck C; Wenzel A
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Apr; 85(4):462-72. PubMed ID: 9574959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Indirect digital images: limit of image compression for diagnosis in endodontics.
    Siragusa M; McDonnell DJ
    Int Endod J; 2002 Dec; 35(12):991-5. PubMed ID: 12653317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.