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 *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14713084)

  • 1. Determination of the two-dimensional detective quantum efficiency of a computed radiography system.
    Båth M; Håkansson M; Månsson LG
    Med Phys; 2003 Dec; 30(12):3172-82. PubMed ID: 14713084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of a simple method for deriving the presampled modulation transfer function of a digital radiographic system from an edge image.
    Buhr E; Günther-Kohfahl S; Neitzel U
    Med Phys; 2003 Sep; 30(9):2323-31. PubMed ID: 14528954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Determination of the modulation transfer function using the edge method: influence of scattered radiation.
    Neitzel U; Buhr E; Hilgers G; Granfors PR
    Med Phys; 2004 Dec; 31(12):3485-91. PubMed ID: 15651631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Early experience in the use of quantitative image quality measurements for the quality assurance of full field digital mammography x-ray systems.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Sep; 52(18):5545-68. PubMed ID: 17804881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of the imaging properties of an amorphous selenium-based flat panel detector for digital fluoroscopy.
    Hunt DC; Tousignant O; Rowlands JA
    Med Phys; 2004 May; 31(5):1166-75. PubMed ID: 15191306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 May; 51(10):2441-63. PubMed ID: 16675862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Physical evaluation of a needle photostimulable phosphor based CR mammography system.
    Marshall NW; Lemmens K; Bosmans H
    Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):811-24. PubMed ID: 22320791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Imaging performance of amorphous selenium based flat-panel detectors for digital mammography: characterization of a small area prototype detector.
    Zhao W; Ji WG; Debrie A; Rowlands JA
    Med Phys; 2003 Feb; 30(2):254-63. PubMed ID: 12607843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Imaging properties of digital magnification radiography.
    Boyce SJ; Samei E
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):984-96. PubMed ID: 16696475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of edge analysis techniques for the determination of the MTF of digital radiographic systems.
    Samei E; Buhr E; Granfors P; Vandenbroucke D; Wang X
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Aug; 50(15):3613-25. PubMed ID: 16030386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of the effects of pixel loss on image quality in direct digital radiography.
    Padgett R; Kotre CJ
    Phys Med Biol; 2004 Mar; 49(6):977-86. PubMed ID: 15104320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Influence of cassette type on the DQE of CR systems.
    Monnin P; Holzer Z; Wolf R; Neitzel U; Vock P; Gudinchet F; Verdun FR
    Med Phys; 2006 Oct; 33(10):3637-9. PubMed ID: 17089829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An image quality comparison of standard and dual-side read CR systems for pediatric radiology.
    Monnin P; Holzer Z; Wolf R; Neitzel U; Vock P; Gudinchet F; Verdun FR
    Med Phys; 2006 Feb; 33(2):411-20. PubMed ID: 16532949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accurate MTF measurement in digital radiography using noise response.
    Kuhls-Gilcrist A; Jain A; Bednarek DR; Hoffmann KR; Rudin S
    Med Phys; 2010 Feb; 37(2):724-35. PubMed ID: 20229882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Quantitative image quality measurements of a digital breast tomosynthesis system.
    Olgar T; Kahn T; Gosch D
    Rofo; 2013 Dec; 185(12):1188-94. PubMed ID: 23888475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Performance characteristics of a Kodak computed radiography system.
    Bradford CD; Peppler WW; Dobbins JT
    Med Phys; 1999 Jan; 26(1):27-37. PubMed ID: 9949395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Micro-angiography for neuro-vascular imaging. II. Cascade model analysis.
    Ganguly A; Rudin S; Bednarek DR; Hoffmann KR
    Med Phys; 2003 Nov; 30(11):3029-39. PubMed ID: 14655950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. High-resolution imager for digital mammography: physical characterization of a prototype sensor.
    Suryanarayanan S; Karellas A; Vedantham S; Onishi SK
    Phys Med Biol; 2005 Sep; 50(17):3957-69. PubMed ID: 16177523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Impact of additive noise on system performance of a digital X-ray imaging system.
    Zhang D; Rong J; Chen WR; Gao F; Xu K; Wu X; Liu H
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2007 Jan; 54(1):69-73. PubMed ID: 17260857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. On site evaluation of three flat panel detectors for digital radiography.
    Borasi G; Nitrosi A; Ferrari P; Tassoni D
    Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1719-31. PubMed ID: 12906189
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.