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 *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1574314)

  • 21. Effective dose and risk assessment from computed tomography of the maxillofacial complex.
    Frederiksen NL; Benson BW; Sokolowski TW
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Feb; 24(1):55-8. PubMed ID: 8593910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Absorbed bone marrow dose in certain dental radiographic techniques.
    White SC; Rose TC
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1979 Apr; 98(4):553-8. PubMed ID: 285130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Doses to patients from pantomographic and conventional dental radiography.
    Wall BF; Fisher ES; Paynter R; Hudson A; Bird PD
    Br J Radiol; 1979 Sep; 52(621):727-34. PubMed ID: 476387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Absorbed doses to critical organs from full mouth dental radiography].
    Zhang G; Yasuhiko O; Hidegiko Y
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 1999 Jan; 34(1):5-8. PubMed ID: 11776538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Using GafChromic film to estimate the effective dose from dental cone beam CT and panoramic radiography.
    Al-Okshi A; Nilsson M; Petersson A; Wiese M; Lindh C
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(7):20120343. PubMed ID: 23610090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Absorbed and effective doses from cone beam volumetric imaging for implant planning.
    Okano T; Harata Y; Sugihara Y; Sakaino R; Tsuchida R; Iwai K; Seki K; Araki K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Feb; 38(2):79-85. PubMed ID: 19176649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Comparison of radiation dose for implant imaging using conventional spiral tomography, computed tomography, and cone-beam computed tomography.
    Chau AC; Fung K
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Apr; 107(4):559-65. PubMed ID: 19168378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Dosimetry of a cone-beam computed tomography machine compared with a digital x-ray machine in orthodontic imaging.
    Grünheid T; Kolbeck Schieck JR; Pliska BT; Ahmad M; Larson BE
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2012 Apr; 141(4):436-43. PubMed ID: 22464525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A comparative study of the effective radiation doses from cone beam computed tomography and plain radiography for sialography.
    Jadu F; Yaffe MJ; Lam EW
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2010 Jul; 39(5):257-63. PubMed ID: 20587648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. ESTIMATION OF EFFECTIVE DOSE OF DENTAL X-RAY DEVICES.
    Qiang W; Qiang F; Lin L
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2019 Jun; 183(4):417-421. PubMed ID: 30169836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Doses in eye lens, thyroid, salivary glands, mammary glands, and gonads, due to radiation scattered in dental orthopantomography.
    Campillo-Rivera GE; Vázquez-Bañuelos J; García-Duran Á; Escalona-Llaguno MI; Arteaga MV; Vega-Carrillo HR
    Appl Radiat Isot; 2019 Apr; 146():57-60. PubMed ID: 30753985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Conventional spiral and low-dose computed mandibular tomography for dental implant planning.
    Ekestubbe A
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1999; 138():1-82. PubMed ID: 10635103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Radiation doses of collimated vs non-collimated cephalometric exposures.
    Gijbels F; Sanderink G; Wyatt J; Van Dam J; Nowak B; Jacobs R
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Mar; 32(2):128-33. PubMed ID: 12775668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Dosimetric study of mandible examinations performed with three cone-beam computed tomography scanners.
    Khoury HJ; Andrade ME; Araujo MW; Brasileiro IV; Kramer R; Huda A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Jul; 165(1-4):162-5. PubMed ID: 25897144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Absorbed organ and effective doses from digital intra-oral and panoramic radiography applying the ICRP 103 recommendations for effective dose estimations.
    Granlund C; Thilander-Klang A; Ylhan B; Lofthag-Hansen S; Ekestubbe A
    Br J Radiol; 2016 Oct; 89(1066):20151052. PubMed ID: 27452261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Reduction of absorbed doses to the thyroid gland in orthodontic treatment planning by reducing the area of irradiation.
    Svenson B; Sjöholm B; Jonsson B
    Swed Dent J; 2004; 28(3):137-47. PubMed ID: 15506691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Radiation dosimetry in specific area radiography.
    Brand JW; Kuba RK; Aeppli DM; Johnson JC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Mar; 67(3):347-53. PubMed ID: 2648245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Assessment of radiation exposure in dental cone-beam computerized tomography with the use of metal-oxide semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET) dosimeters and Monte Carlo simulations.
    Koivisto J; Kiljunen T; Tapiovaara M; Wolff J; Kortesniemi M
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2012 Sep; 114(3):393-400. PubMed ID: 22862982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. [Low-dosage dental CT].
    Rustemeyer P; Streubühr U; Hohn HP; Rustemeyer R; Eich HT; John-Mikolajewski V; Müller RD
    Rofo; 1999 Aug; 171(2):130-5. PubMed ID: 10506887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A comparison of the effective dose from scanography with periapical radiography.
    Gijbels F; Jacobs R; Sanderink G; De Smet E; Nowak B; Van Dam J; Van Steenberghe D
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 May; 31(3):159-63. PubMed ID: 12058262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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