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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15373251)

  • 1. Comparison of seven digital cameras for digitizing radiographs.
    Brault B; Hoskinson J; Armbrust L; Milliken G
    Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2004; 45(4):298-304. PubMed ID: 15373251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of digitized and direct viewed (analog) radiographic images for detection of pulmonary nodules.
    Armbrust LJ; Hoskinson JJ; Biller DS; Ostmeyer RM; Milliken GA; Choi J
    Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2005; 46(5):361-7. PubMed ID: 16250391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Digital cameras: a practical solution for radiologists (review)].
    Oztürk A; Oztürk E
    Tani Girisim Radyol; 2003 Dec; 9(4):401-6. PubMed ID: 14730946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison between different cost devices for digital capture of X-ray films: an image characteristics detection approach.
    Salazar AJ; Camacho JC; Aguirre DA
    J Digit Imaging; 2012 Feb; 25(1):91-100. PubMed ID: 21614654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Standardizing digital photography: it's not all in the eye of the beholder.
    Galdino GM; Vogel JE; Vander Kolk CA
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2001 Oct; 108(5):1334-44. PubMed ID: 11604641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Digitizing pediatric chest radiographs: comparison of low-cost, commercial off-the-shelf technologies.
    Ruess L; Uyehara CF; Shiels KC; Cho KH; O'Connor SC; Person DA; Whitton RK
    Pediatr Radiol; 2001 Dec; 31(12):841-7. PubMed ID: 11727017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Clarity and diagnostic quality of digitized conventional intraoral radiographs.
    Goga R; Chandler NP; Love RM
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Mar; 33(2):103-7. PubMed ID: 15314002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cost-effective handling of digital medical images in the telemedicine environment.
    Choong MK; Logeswaran R; Bister M
    Int J Med Inform; 2007 Sep; 76(9):646-54. PubMed ID: 16769242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of 10 digital SLR cameras for orthodontic photography.
    Bister D; Mordarai F; Aveling RM
    J Orthod; 2006 Sep; 33(3):223-30. PubMed ID: 16926316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of radiographic image quality from four digitization devices as viewed on computer monitors.
    Davidson HC; Johnston DJ; Christian ME; Harnsberger HR
    J Digit Imaging; 2001 Mar; 14(1):24-9. PubMed ID: 11310912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography with respect to contrast and spatial resolution in tissue equivalent breast phantoms.
    Kuzmiak CM; Pisano ED; Cole EB; Zeng D; Burns CB; Roberto C; Pavic D; Lee Y; Seo BK; Koomen M; Washburn D
    Med Phys; 2005 Oct; 32(10):3144-50. PubMed ID: 16279068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of plain film radiographs between original film and smartphone capture: a pilot study.
    Licurse MY; Kim SH; Kim W; Ruutiainen AT; Cook TS
    J Digit Imaging; 2015 Dec; 28(6):646-53. PubMed ID: 25840654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Latitude and noise comparisons between digital cameras and a radiographic film scanner.
    Whitehouse R; Moulding F
    J Telemed Telecare; 2000; 6 Suppl 1():S41-2. PubMed ID: 10793968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 35-mm film scanner as an intraoral dental radiograph digitizer. I: A quantitative evaluation.
    Shrout MK; Potter BJ; Yurgalavage HM; Hildebolt CF; Vannier MW
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1993 Oct; 76(4):502-9. PubMed ID: 8233432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Computed radiography and film digitizer inputs to an intensive care unit teleradiology system: an image quality comparison.
    Huda W; Honeyman JC; Palmer CK; Frost MM; Staab EV
    Acad Radiol; 1996 Feb; 3(2):110-4. PubMed ID: 8796650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical experience with an advanced laser digitizer for cost-effective digital radiography.
    MacMahon H; Xu XW; Hoffmann KR; Giger ML; Yoshimura H; Doi K; Carlin M; Kano A; Yao L; Abe K
    Radiographics; 1993 May; 13(3):635-45; discussion 645-6. PubMed ID: 8316670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [The spatial resolution of the digital storage phosphor system. The monitor and film compared].
    Nessi R; Castellana L; Paruccini N; Blanc M; Uslenghi CM
    Radiol Med; 1995 Sep; 90(3):298-302. PubMed ID: 7501837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Digital chest imaging: comparison of two film image digitizers with a classification task.
    Kundel HL; Mezrich JL; Brickman I; Siegel R; Miller WT; Epstein DM; Gefter WB; Arenson RL; Seshadri SB; Khalsa S
    Radiology; 1987 Dec; 165(3):747-52. PubMed ID: 3685354
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. "Evaluation of a very low-cost and simple teleradiology technique".
    Khodaie M; Askari A; Bahaadinbeigy K
    J Digit Imaging; 2015 Jun; 28(3):295-301. PubMed ID: 25561065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Agreement and reading time for differently-priced devices for the digital capture of X-ray films.
    Salazar AJ; Camacho JC; Aguirre DA
    J Telemed Telecare; 2012 Mar; 18(2):82-5. PubMed ID: 22169230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.