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 *

71 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15709101)

  • 1. The effects of incremental brightness and contrast adjustments on radiographic data: a quantitative study.
    Güneri P; Lomçali G; Boyacioğlu H; Kendir S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2005 Jan; 34(1):20-7. PubMed ID: 15709101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Revisiting dynamic range and image enhancement ability of contemporary digital radiographic systems.
    Marinho-Vieira LE; Martins LAC; Freitas DQ; Haiter-Neto F; Oliveira ML
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2022 May; 51(4):20210404. PubMed ID: 34860568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Measurement accuracy of marginal bone level in digital radiographs with and without color coding.
    Li G; Engström PE; Welander U
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2007 Oct; 65(5):254-8. PubMed ID: 18092199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Correction for attenuation and visual response in digital radiography.
    Welande U; Yoshiura K; Li G; Sällström P; McDavid WD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Mar; 31(2):117-25. PubMed ID: 12076052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Bitewing-based alveolar bone densitometry: digital imaging resolution requirements.
    Hildebolt CF; Bartlett TQ; Brunsden BS; Hente NL; Gravier MJ; Walkup RK; Shrout MK; Vannier MW
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1994 Aug; 23(3):129-34. PubMed ID: 7835512
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A robust generalized fuzzy operator approach to film contrast correction in digital subtraction radiography.
    Leung CC
    Med Biol Eng Comput; 2006 Mar; 44(1-2):95-104. PubMed ID: 16929926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Marginal bone levels measured in film and digital radiographs corrected for attenuation and visual response: an in vivo study.
    Li G; Engström PE; Nasström K; Lü ZY; Sanderink G; Welander U
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Jan; 36(1):7-11. PubMed ID: 17329581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Some characteristics of solid-state and photo-stimulable phosphor detectors for intra-oral radiography.
    Borg E
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1999; 139():i-viii, 1-67. PubMed ID: 10635104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Digital subtraction radiographic analysis of GTR in human intrabony defects.
    Danesh-Meyer MJ; Chen ST; Rams TE
    Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 2002 Oct; 22(5):441-9. PubMed ID: 12449304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The application of digital radiography and radiodensitometry in evaluation of chronic fibrous periapical changes of endodontically untreated teeth.
    Czelej-Górski J; Rózyło TK; Rózyło-Kalinowska I
    Ann Univ Mariae Curie Sklodowska Med; 2001; 56():111-8. PubMed ID: 11977296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Computer-assisted densitometric image analysis of digital subtraction images: in vivo error of the method and effect of thresholding.
    Brägger U; Bürgin W; Fourmousis I; Schmid G; Schild U; Lang NP
    J Periodontol; 1998 Sep; 69(9):967-74. PubMed ID: 9776024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Degradation of storage phosphor images due to scanning delay.
    Akdeniz BG; Gröndahl HG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 Mar; 35(2):74-7. PubMed ID: 16549432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Quality aspects of digital radiography in general dental practice.
    Hellén-Halme K
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 2007; (184):9-60. PubMed ID: 17645148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Perceptibility curve test for digital radiographs before and after application of various image processing algorithms.
    Alpöz E; Soğur E; Baksi Akdeniz BG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):490-4. PubMed ID: 18033946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of bit depth and kVp of digital radiography for detection of subtle differences.
    Heo MS; Choi DH; Benavides E; Huh KH; Yi WJ; Lee SS; Choi SC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Aug; 108(2):278-83. PubMed ID: 19272812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Periodontal disease morbidity quantification. II. Validation of alveolar bone loss measurements and vertical defect diagnosis from digital bite-wing images.
    Hildebolt CF; Vannier MW; Shrout MK; Pilgram TK; Province M; Vahey EP; Rietz DW
    J Periodontol; 1990 Oct; 61(10):623-32. PubMed ID: 2231229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Imaging of dental implants in severely resorbed maxillae using detailed narrow-beam radiography. A methodological study.
    Svenson B; Palmqvist S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1996 Apr; 25(2):67-70. PubMed ID: 9446975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Evaluation of a dental subtraction radiography system.
    Ellwood RP; Davies RM; Worthington HV
    J Periodontal Res; 1997 Feb; 32(2):241-8. PubMed ID: 9089491
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of changes in dental and bone radiographic densities in the presence of different soft-tissue simulators using pixel intensity and digital subtraction analyses.
    de Molon RS; Batitucci RG; Spin-Neto R; Paquier GM; Sakakura CE; Tosoni GM; Scaf G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(9):20130235. PubMed ID: 24005061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Fraudulent use of digital radiographs: secret reality or fiction?].
    Calberson F; Hommez G; De Moor R
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2005; 60(1):58-67. PubMed ID: 15943060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.