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 *

172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14747935)

  • 21. Soft-copy reading of digital chest radiographs: effect of ambient light and automatic optimization of monitor luminance.
    Uffmann M; Prokop M; Kupper W; Mang T; Fiedler V; Schaefer-Prokop C
    Invest Radiol; 2005 Mar; 40(3):180-5. PubMed ID: 15714093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Image quality degradation by light scattering in display devices.
    Flynn MJ; Badano A
    J Digit Imaging; 1999 May; 12(2):50-9. PubMed ID: 10342247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Automated analysis of phantom images for the evaluation of long-term reproducibility in digital mammography.
    Gennaro G; Ferro F; Contento G; Fornasin F; di Maggio C
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Mar; 52(5):1387-407. PubMed ID: 17301461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Temporal variation in the luminance level of stimuli displayed on a cathode-ray tube monitor: effects on performance on a visual vigilance task.
    Blanco MJ; Leirós LI
    Ergonomics; 2000 Feb; 43(2):239-51. PubMed ID: 10675061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Soft-copy reading in digital mammography of mass: diagnostic performance of a 5-megapixel cathode ray tube monitor versus a 3-megapixel liquid crystal display monitor in a diagnostic setting.
    Uematsu T; Kasami M
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):623-9. PubMed ID: 18568553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Optimization of region of interest luminances may enhance radiologists' light adaptation.
    O'Connell NM; Toomey RJ; McEntee M; Ryan J; Stowe J; Adams A; Brennan PC
    Acad Radiol; 2008 Apr; 15(4):488-93. PubMed ID: 18342774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A clinical evaluation of the image quality computer program, CoCIQ.
    Norrman E; Gårdestig M; Persliden J; Geijer H
    J Digit Imaging; 2005 Jun; 18(2):138-44. PubMed ID: 15827822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. 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]  

  • 29. Assessment of a novel, high-resolution, color, AMLCD for diagnostic medical image display: luminance performance and DICOM calibration.
    Averbukh AN; Channin DS; Flynn MJ
    J Digit Imaging; 2003 Sep; 16(3):270-9. PubMed ID: 14669065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. CRT diagnosis of pulmonary disease: influence of monitor brightness and room illuminance on observer performance.
    Ishihara S; Shimamoto K; Ikeda M; Kato K; Mori Y; Ishiguchi T; Ishigaki T
    Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2002; 26(3):181-5. PubMed ID: 11918981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Visual assessment method of angular performance in medical liquid-crystal displays by use of the ANG test pattern: effect of ambient illuminance and effectiveness of modified scoring.
    Ikushima Y; Morishita J; Akamine H; Nakamura Y; Hashimoto N
    Radiol Phys Technol; 2014 Jan; 7(1):51-6. PubMed ID: 23934325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Quality assurance phantom for digital dental imaging.
    Mah P; McDavid WD; Dove SB
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2011 Nov; 112(5):632-9. PubMed ID: 21862364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Influence of film and monitor display luminance on observer performance and visual search.
    Krupinski E; Roehrig H; Furukawa T
    Acad Radiol; 1999 Jul; 6(7):411-8. PubMed ID: 10410166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Recognition and prevention of computed radiography image artifacts.
    Hammerstrom K; Aldrich J; Alves L; Ho A
    J Digit Imaging; 2006 Sep; 19(3):226-39. PubMed ID: 16710796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The effects of ambient lighting in chest radiology reading rooms.
    Pollard BJ; Samei E; Chawla AS; Beam C; Heyneman LE; Koweek LM; Martinez-Jimenez S; Washington L; Hashimoto N; McAdams HP
    J Digit Imaging; 2012 Aug; 25(4):520-6. PubMed ID: 22349990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Performance of primary diagnostic monitors (PDMs) over time.
    Ruuge AE; Gao Y; Erdi YE
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Dec; 20(12):180-185. PubMed ID: 31833641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Image-quality figure evaluator based on contrast-detail phantom in radiography.
    Wang CL; Wang CM; Chan YK; Chen RT
    Int J Med Robot; 2012 Jun; 8(2):169-77. PubMed ID: 22213357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Digital mammography image quality: image display.
    Siegel E; Krupinski E; Samei E; Flynn M; Andriole K; Erickson B; Thomas J; Badano A; Seibert JA; Pisano ED
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2006 Aug; 3(8):615-27. PubMed ID: 17412136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Probabilistic exposure fusion.
    Song M; Tao D; Chen C; Bu J; Luo J; Zhang C
    IEEE Trans Image Process; 2012 Jan; 21(1):341-57. PubMed ID: 21609883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A preliminary study for exploring the luminance ratio of liquid-crystal displays required for display of radiographs.
    Takarabe S; Morishita J; Yabuuchi H; Akamine H; Hashimoto N; Nakamura Y; Matsuo Y; Hattori A
    Radiol Phys Technol; 2014 Jan; 7(1):73-8. PubMed ID: 24002707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.