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 *

186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12107580)

  • 1. Pediatric high KV/filtered airway radiographs: comparison of CR and film-screen systems.
    Nickoloff EL; Berdon WE; Lu ZF; Ruzal-Shapiro CB; So JC; Dutta AK
    Pediatr Radiol; 2002 Jul; 32(7):476-84. PubMed ID: 12107580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A framework for optimising the radiographic technique in digital X-ray imaging.
    Samei E; Dobbins JT; Lo JY; Tornai MP
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):220-9. PubMed ID: 15933112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of testing of collimator and beam alignment, focal spot size with slit camera, and tube current consistency using computed radiography and conventional screen-film systems.
    Meechai T; Chousangsuntorn K; Owasirikul W; Mongkolsuk M; Iampa W
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Jun; 20(6):160-169. PubMed ID: 31095873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Advances in computed radiography systems and their physical imaging characteristics.
    Cowen AR; Davies AG; Kengyelics SM
    Clin Radiol; 2007 Dec; 62(12):1132-41. PubMed ID: 17981160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Pediatric musculoskeletal computed radiography.
    Kottamasu SR; Kuhns LR; Stringer DA
    Pediatr Radiol; 1997 Jul; 27(7):563-75. PubMed ID: 9211947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Low-dose digital computed radiography in pediatric chest imaging.
    Kogutt MS; Jones JP; Perkins DD
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1988 Oct; 151(4):775-9. PubMed ID: 3262278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The impact of increased Al filtration on x-ray tube loading and image quality in diagnostic radiology.
    Behrman RH
    Med Phys; 2003 Jan; 30(1):69-78. PubMed ID: 12557981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Image enhancement using computed radiography.
    Long BW
    Radiol Technol; 1990; 61(4):276-80. PubMed ID: 2326438
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Optimal beam quality for chest computed radiography.
    Oda N; Nakata H; Murakami S; Terada K; Nakamura K; Yoshida A
    Invest Radiol; 1996 Mar; 31(3):126-31. PubMed ID: 8675419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. AEC set-up optimisation with computed radiography imaging.
    Mazzocchi S; Belli G; Busoni S; Gori C; Menchi I; Salucci P; Taddeucci A; Zatelli G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):169-73. PubMed ID: 16461503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of the use of multi-layer filter on radiation exposure and the quality of upper airway radiographs compared to the traditional copper filter.
    Klandima S; Kruatrachue A; Wongtapradit L; Nithipanya N; Ratanaprakarn W
    J Med Assoc Thai; 2014 Jun; 97 Suppl 6():S213-9. PubMed ID: 25391196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Performance comparison of an active matrix flat panel imager, computed radiography system, and a screen-film system at four standard radiation qualities.
    Monnin P; Gutierrez D; Bulling S; Lepori D; Valley JF; Verdun FR
    Med Phys; 2005 Feb; 32(2):343-50. PubMed ID: 15789578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of imaging properties of a computed radiography system and screen-film systems.
    Sanada S; Doi K; Xu XW; Yin FF; Giger ML; MacMahon H
    Med Phys; 1991; 18(3):414-20. PubMed ID: 1870484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Measurement of focal spot size with slit camera using computed radiography and flat-panel based digital detectors.
    Rong XJ; Krugh KT; Shepard SJ; Geiser WR
    Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1768-75. PubMed ID: 12906194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Optimising automatic exposure control in computed radiography and the impact on patient dose.
    Doyle P; Gentle D; Martin CJ
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):236-9. PubMed ID: 15933114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Objective assessment of image quality in conventional and digital mammography taking into account dynamic range.
    Pachoud M; Lepori D; Valley JF; Verdun FR
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):380-2. PubMed ID: 15933141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Assessment of the problem: pediatric doses in screen-film and digital radiography.
    Huda W
    Pediatr Radiol; 2004 Oct; 34 Suppl 3():S173-82; discussion S234-41. PubMed ID: 15558259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Diagnostic accuracy of in vitro panoramic radiographs depending on the exposure.
    Kaeppler G; Dietz K; Reinert S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Feb; 36(2):68-74. PubMed ID: 17403882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Advantages of magnification in digital phase-contrast mammography using a practical X-ray tube.
    Honda C; Ohara H
    Eur J Radiol; 2008 Dec; 68(3 Suppl):S69-72. PubMed ID: 18584984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.