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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12076052)

  • 1. Correction for attenuation and visual response in digital radiography.
    Welande U; Yoshiura K; Li G; Sällström P; McDavid WD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Mar; 31(2):117-25. PubMed ID: 12076052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Visual linearization of the display of digital radiographs.
    Li G; Yoshiura K; Welander U; Sällstrom P; McDavid WD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Mar; 31(2):131-6. PubMed ID: 12076054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Perceptibility curve test for digital radiographs before and after correction for attenuation and correction for attenuation and visual response.
    Li G; Welander U; Yoshiura K; Shi XQ; McDavid WD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Nov; 32(6):372-8. PubMed ID: 15070839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of bit depth and kVp of digital radiography for detection of subtle differences.
    Heo MS; Choi DH; Benavides E; Huh KH; Yi WJ; Lee SS; Choi SC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Aug; 108(2):278-83. PubMed ID: 19272812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparative investigation of subjective image quality of digital intraoral radiographs processed with 3 image-processing algorithms.
    Li G
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2004 Jun; 97(6):762-7. PubMed ID: 15184861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Conventional and predicted perceptibility curves for contrast-enhanced direct digital intraoral radiographs.
    Yoshiura K; Welander U; Shi XQ; Li G; Kawazu T; Tatsumi M; Okamura K; McDavid WD; Kanda S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 Jul; 30(4):219-25. PubMed ID: 11681484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Detection of approximal caries in digital radiographs before and after correction for attenuation and visual response. An in vitro study.
    Li G; Yoshiura K; Welander U; Shi XQ; McDavid WD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Mar; 31(2):113-6. PubMed ID: 12076051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of endodontic files in digital radiographs before and after employing three image processing algorithms.
    Li G; Sanderink GC; Welander U; McDavid WD; Näsström K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Jan; 33(1):6-11. PubMed ID: 15140815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Perceptibility curve test for digital radiographs before and after application of various image processing algorithms.
    Alpöz E; Soğur E; Baksi Akdeniz BG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):490-4. PubMed ID: 18033946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Clinical efficacy of a new software developed for dental digital subtraction radiography.
    Güneri P; Gögüs S; Tuğsel Z; Ozturk A; Gungor C; Boyacioğlu H
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 Nov; 35(6):417-21. PubMed ID: 17082332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessing the image quality of a CCD-based digital intraoral radiography system: application of perceptibility curve test.
    Hayakawa Y; Kitagawa H; Wakoh M; Kuroyanagi K; Welander U
    Bull Tokyo Dent Coll; 2000 Feb; 41(1):9-14. PubMed ID: 11212381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Marginal bone levels measured in film and digital radiographs corrected for attenuation and visual response: an in vivo study.
    Li G; Engström PE; Nasström K; Lü ZY; Sanderink G; Welander U
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Jan; 36(1):7-11. PubMed ID: 17329581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparative study of two digital radiographic storage phosphor systems.
    Oliveira AE; de Almeida SM; Paganini GA; Haiter Neto F; Bóscolo FN
    Braz Dent J; 2000; 11(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 11210259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Psychophysical properties of a new F-speed intraoral film.
    Mastoris M; Yoshiura K; Welander U; Tsiklakis K; Papadakis E; Li G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 May; 33(3):158-63. PubMed ID: 15371315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Quality of film-based and digital panoramic radiography.
    Molander B; Gröndahl HG; Ekestubbe A
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Jan; 33(1):32-6. PubMed ID: 15140820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Fraudulent use of digital radiographs: secret reality or fiction?].
    Calberson F; Hommez G; De Moor R
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2005; 60(1):58-67. PubMed ID: 15943060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A new method for the automated alignment of dental radiographs for digital subtraction radiography.
    Yoon DC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jan; 29(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 10654031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Effect of monitor luminance and ambient light on observer performance in soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs.
    Goo JM; Choi JY; Im JG; Lee HJ; Chung MJ; Han D; Park SH; Kim JH; Nam SH
    Radiology; 2004 Sep; 232(3):762-6. PubMed ID: 15273338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Estimating distances on direct digital images and conventional radiographs.
    Versteeg KH; Sanderink GC; van Ginkel FC; van der Stelt PF
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1997 Apr; 128(4):439-43. PubMed ID: 9103793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Influence of the digital image display monitor on observer performance.
    Cederberg RA; Frederiksen NL; Benson BW; Shulman JD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jul; 28(4):203-7. PubMed ID: 10455382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.