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 *

155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12076899)

  • 1. Technologists' productivity when using PACS: comparison of film-based versus filmless radiography.
    Reiner BI; Siegel EL
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Jul; 179(1):33-7. PubMed ID: 12076899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of film-based versus filmless operation on the productivity of CT technologists.
    Reiner BI; Siegel EL; Hooper FJ; Glasser D
    Radiology; 1998 May; 207(2):481-5. PubMed ID: 9577498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Productivity and cost assessment of computed radiography, digital radiography, and screen-film for outpatient chest examinations.
    Andriole KP
    J Digit Imaging; 2002 Sep; 15(3):161-9. PubMed ID: 12532253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A comparison of film-screen, CR and DR: a community hospital time-motion study.
    Mehta M; Lee T
    Radiol Manage; 2003; 25(6):38-42. PubMed ID: 14699926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Changes in technologist productivity with implementation of an enterprisewide PACS.
    Reiner B; Siegel E; Scanlon M
    J Digit Imaging; 2002 Mar; 15(1):22-6. PubMed ID: 12134211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Workflow assessment of digital versus computed radiography and screen-film in the outpatient environment.
    Andriole KP; Luth DM; Gould RG
    J Digit Imaging; 2002; 15 Suppl 1():124-6. PubMed ID: 12105711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of PACS on the time required for technologists to produce radiographic images in the emergency department radiology suite.
    Redfern RO; Langlotz CP; Abbuhl SB; Polansky M; Horii SC; Kundel HL
    J Digit Imaging; 2002 Sep; 15(3):153-60. PubMed ID: 12415466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Soft-copy computed radiography in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units: cost-savings analysis.
    Don S; Albertina MJ; Ammann DL; Evens RG; Siegel MJ
    Radiology; 1995 Nov; 197(2):501-5. PubMed ID: 7480702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Workflow optimization: current trends and future directions.
    Reiner B; Siegel E; Carrino JA
    J Digit Imaging; 2002 Sep; 15(3):141-52. PubMed ID: 12481228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Chest radiography: depiction of normal anatomy and pathologic structures with selenium-based digital radiography versus conventional screen-film radiography.
    Woodard PK; Slone RM; Gierada DS; Reiker GG; Pilgram TK; Jost RG
    Radiology; 1997 Apr; 203(1):197-201. PubMed ID: 9122392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Clinical evaluation of asymmetric film-screen system for thoracic lesions].
    Shimizu T; Yamamoto K; Ogura Y; Aratake K; Nakata Y; Saika Y; Sagami A; Ashina K; Sueyoshi K; Narabayashi I
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1994 May; 54(6):465-70. PubMed ID: 8028952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. SCAR Radiologic Technologist Survey: analysis of the impact of digital technologies on productivity.
    Reiner BI; Siegel EL; Carrino JA; Goldburgh MM
    J Digit Imaging; 2002 Sep; 15(3):132-40. PubMed ID: 12481227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Diagnostic value of digital projection radiography in comparison with conventional roentgen technique].
    Krug B; Zähringer M; Lackner K
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1997 Mar; 7(2):65-8. PubMed ID: 9172665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Optimization of the thoracic radiograph. Experimental and clinical study on the use of various film/screen combinations using rare earths].
    Bergonzini R; Gallini R; Giugni U; Robecchi D; Amato M
    Radiol Med; 1986 May; 72(5):261-6. PubMed ID: 3715076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [High intensification film-screen systems in thoracic diagnosis. A clinical comparative study].
    Schäfer CB; Sokiranski R; Claussen CD
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1995 Nov; 5(6):389-93. PubMed ID: 8580141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Selenium-based digital radiography of the cervical spine: comparison with screen-film radiography for the depiction of anatomic details].
    Ludwig K; Diederich S; Wormanns D; Link TM; Lenzen H; Heindel W
    Rofo; 2002 Aug; 174(8):1028-32. PubMed ID: 12142983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of doses for bedside examinations of the chest with conventional screen-film and computed radiography: results of a randomized controlled trial.
    Weatherburn GC; Bryan S; Davies JG
    Radiology; 2000 Dec; 217(3):707-12. PubMed ID: 11110932
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Direct comparison of conventional and computed radiography with a dual-image recording technique.
    MacMahon H; Sanada S; Doi K; Giger M; Xu XW; Yin FF; Montner SM; Carlin M
    Radiographics; 1991 Mar; 11(2):259-68. PubMed ID: 2028063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography.
    Bacher K; Smeets P; Bonnarens K; De Hauwere A; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Oct; 181(4):923-9. PubMed ID: 14500203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of image reject rates when using film, hard copy computed radiography and soft copy images on picture archiving and communication systems (PACS) workstations.
    Weatherburn GC; Bryan S; West M
    Br J Radiol; 1999 Jul; 72(859):653-60. PubMed ID: 10624322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.