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 *

87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12642276)

  • 1. Viewing conditions for diagnostic images in three major Dublin hospitals: a comparison with WHO and CEC recommendations.
    McCarthy E; Brennan PC
    Br J Radiol; 2003 Feb; 76(902):94-7. PubMed ID: 12642276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessment of monitor conditions for the display of radiological diagnostic images and ambient lighting.
    Wade C; Brennan PC
    Br J Radiol; 2004 Jun; 77(918):465-71. PubMed ID: 15151966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Viewing boxes: a survey in diagnostic radiology departments of Moroccan hospitals.
    Bentayeb F; Nfaoiu K; Basraoui O; Azevedo AC
    Phys Med; 2010 Oct; 26(4):220-3. PubMed ID: 20036176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. [Quality assurance measures within DIN 6856: the adaptation of film viewing boxes and their specifications in the radiology department of a university hospital. Deutsche Industrie-Norm].
    Kirchner J; Kollath J
    Rofo; 1996 Feb; 164(2):146-9. PubMed ID: 8679977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Suspension criteria for image monitors and viewing boxes.
    Tingberg A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Feb; 153(2):230-5. PubMed ID: 23188811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Radiographic viewing conditions at Johannesburg Hospital.
    Nyathi T; Mwale A; Segone P; Mhlanga Sh; Pule M
    Biomed Imaging Interv J; 2008 Apr; 4(2):e17. PubMed ID: 21614322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Irish X-ray departments demonstrate varying levels of adherence to European guidelines on good radiographic technique.
    Brennan PC; Johnston D
    Br J Radiol; 2002 Mar; 75(891):243-8. PubMed ID: 11932218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Film viewing conditions in mammography.
    Hill SJ; Faulkner K; Law J; Starritt HC
    Br J Radiol; 1997 Apr; 70(832):409-11. PubMed ID: 9166078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Illumination of x-rays: the usual lights exposed.
    Blackshaw GR; Gostling JA; Appleton BN; Pearce N; Thomas GV; Lewis WG
    Postgrad Med J; 2003 Feb; 79(928):99-100. PubMed ID: 12612325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An audit of rejected repeated x-ray films as a quality assurance element in a radiology department.
    Eze KC; Omodia N; Okegbunam B; Adewonyi T; Nzotta CC
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2008 Dec; 11(4):355-8. PubMed ID: 19320410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Problems with film processing in medical X-ray imaging in Lithuania.
    Sniureviciute M; Adliene D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):260-3. PubMed ID: 15933118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Testing optimum viewing conditions for mammographic image displays.
    Waynant RW; Chakrabarti K; Kaczmarek RA; Dagenais I
    J Digit Imaging; 1999 May; 12(2 Suppl 1):209-10. PubMed ID: 10342217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessment of mammographic film processor performance in a hospital and mobile screening unit.
    Murray JG; Dowsett DJ; Laird O; Ennis JT
    Br J Radiol; 1992 Dec; 65(780):1097-101. PubMed ID: 1286417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparative study of quality control in diagnostic radiology.
    Kharita MH; Khedr MS; Wannus KM
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 130(4):447-51. PubMed ID: 18385180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The impact of acoustic noise found within clinical departments on radiology performance.
    Brennan PC; Ryan J; Evanoff M; Toomey R; O'Beirne A; Manning D; Chakraborty DP; McEntee M
    Acad Radiol; 2008 Apr; 15(4):472-6. PubMed ID: 18342772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Survey of mammography practice in Croatia: equipment performance, image quality and dose.
    Faj D; Posedel D; Stimac D; Ivezic Z; Kasabasic M; Ivkovic A; Kubelka D; Ilakovac V; Brnic Z; Bjelac OC
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 131(4):535-40. PubMed ID: 18940818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quality assessment and improvement: what radiologists do and think.
    Deitch CH; Chan WC; Sunshine JH; Zinninger MD; Cascade PN; Cochran ST
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Nov; 163(5):1245-54. PubMed ID: 7976910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Local diagnostic reference levels for adult posteroanterior (PA) chest x-ray examination in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
    Teferi S; Admassie D; Worku A; Zewdeneh D
    Ethiop Med J; 2010 Jan; 48(1):49-55. PubMed ID: 20607998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Supporting growth of digital imaging.
    Barnes D
    Health Estate; 2005 Apr; 59(4):38-9. PubMed ID: 15859100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An investigation into the effects of suboptimal viewing conditions in screen-film mammography.
    Robson KJ
    Br J Radiol; 2008 Mar; 81(963):219-31. PubMed ID: 18270296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.