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 *

55 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12076054)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Introduction to perceptual linearization of video display systems for medical image presentation.
    Hemminger BM; Johnston RE; Rolland JP; Muller KE
    J Digit Imaging; 1995 Feb; 8(1):21-34. PubMed ID: 7734526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 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. Computer-assisted orientation of dental periapical radiographs to the occlusal plane.
    Huang CH; Hsu CY
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 May; 105(5):649-53. PubMed ID: 18296083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Diagnostic utility of thermal printed panographs compared with corresponding computer monitor images.
    Guerrant GH; Moore WS; Murchison DF
    Gen Dent; 2001; 49(2):190-6; quiz 197-8. PubMed ID: 12004700
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Quality aspects of digital radiography in general dental practice.
    Hellén-Halme K
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 2007; (184):9-60. PubMed ID: 17645148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of cephalometric landmarks on monitor-displayed radiographs with and without image emboss enhancement.
    Leonardi RM; Giordano D; Maiorana F; Greco M
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 20022892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Digital radiography in general dental practice: a field study.
    Hellén-Halme K; Nilsson M; Petersson A
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Jul; 36(5):249-55. PubMed ID: 17586850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluation of automatic exposure control in a direct digital intraoral system.
    Benchimol D; Näsström K; Shi X
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Sep; 38(6):407-12. PubMed ID: 19700535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Detectability decreases with off-normal viewing in medical liquid crystal displays.
    Badano A; Gallas BD
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Feb; 13(2):210-8. PubMed ID: 16428057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Perceptibility curve test for conventional and colour-coded radiographs.
    Shi XQ; Li G; Yoshiura K; Welander U
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Sep; 33(5):318-22. PubMed ID: 15585809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. [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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.