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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16395231)

  • 21. [Absorbed dose in CT: comparison by CT dose index].
    Yamamoto K; Andou T; Akazawa H
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2002 Apr; 58(4):495-501. PubMed ID: 12469034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluating the impact of extended field-of-view CT reconstructions on CT values and dosimetric accuracy for radiation therapy.
    Cheung JP; Shugard E; Mistry N; Pouliot J; Chen J
    Med Phys; 2019 Feb; 46(2):892-901. PubMed ID: 30457170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners.
    Suomalainen A; Kiljunen T; Käser Y; Peltola J; Kortesniemi M
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Sep; 38(6):367-78. PubMed ID: 19700530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Radiation dose for routine clinical adult brain CT: Variability on different scanners at one institution.
    Jaffe TA; Hoang JK; Yoshizumi TT; Toncheva G; Lowry C; Ravin C
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Aug; 195(2):433-8. PubMed ID: 20651201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Optimizing the Exposure Indicator as a Dose Management Strategy in Computed Radiography.
    Seeram E; Davidson R; Bushong S; Swan H
    Radiol Technol; 2016; 87(4):380-91. PubMed ID: 26952062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Image quality and absorbed dose comparison of single- and dual-source cone-beam computed tomography.
    Miura H; Ozawa S; Okazue T; Kawakubo A; Yamada K; Nagata Y
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2018 May; 19(3):360-366. PubMed ID: 29667294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The relevance of image quality indices for dose optimization in abdominal multi-detector row CT in children: experimental assessment with pediatric phantoms.
    Brisse HJ; Brenot J; Pierrat N; Gaboriaud G; Savignoni A; De Rycke Y; Neuenschwander S; Aubert B; Rosenwald JC
    Phys Med Biol; 2009 Apr; 54(7):1871-92. PubMed ID: 19265204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The effect of z overscanning on patient effective dose from multidetector helical computed tomography examinations.
    Tzedakis A; Damilakis J; Perisinakis K; Stratakis J; Gourtsoyiannis N
    Med Phys; 2005 Jun; 32(6):1621-9. PubMed ID: 16013721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Characteristics and clinical application of a treatment simulator with Ct-option.
    Verellen D; Vinh-Hung V; Bijdekerke P; Nijs F; Linthout N; Bel A; Storme G
    Radiother Oncol; 1999 Mar; 50(3):355-66. PubMed ID: 10392823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Automated low-kilovoltage selection in pediatric computed tomography angiography: phantom study evaluating effects on radiation dose and image quality.
    Siegel MJ; Ramirez-Giraldo JC; Hildebolt C; Bradley D; Schmidt B
    Invest Radiol; 2013 Aug; 48(8):584-9. PubMed ID: 23563195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Tube Current Modulation Between Single- and Dual-Energy CT With a Second-Generation Dual-Source Scanner: Radiation Dose and Image Quality.
    Matsubara K; Takata T; Kobayashi M; Kobayashi S; Koshida K; Gabata T
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2016 Aug; 207(2):354-61. PubMed ID: 27222913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [Influence of Absorbed Dose by Difference of Scanning Starting Angle in Multiphasic CT Imaging].
    Nishihara Y; Kobayashi M; Saito H; Haba T; Asada Y; Teramoto A
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2020; 76(4):346-355. PubMed ID: 32307362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluation of organ doses in CT examinations with an infant anthropomorphic phantom.
    Fujii K; Akahane K; Miyazaki O; Horiuchi T; Shimada A; Nagmatsu H; Yamauchi M; Yamauchi-Kawaura C; Kawasaki T
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):151-5. PubMed ID: 21743079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. On the use of Monte Carlo-derived dosimetric data in the estimation of patient dose from CT examinations.
    Perisinakis K; Tzedakis A; Damilakis J
    Med Phys; 2008 May; 35(5):2018-28. PubMed ID: 18561678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Phantom studies for possible dose reduction in CT head procedures.
    Staniszewska MA; Obrzut M; Rybka K
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):326-31. PubMed ID: 15933131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Synthetic CT: simulating low dose single and dual energy protocols from a dual energy scan.
    Wang AS; Pelc NJ
    Med Phys; 2011 Oct; 38(10):5551-62. PubMed ID: 21992373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Embryo dose estimates in body CT.
    Huda W; Randazzo W; Tipnis S; Frey GD; Mah E
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2010 Apr; 194(4):874-80. PubMed ID: 20308485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Individually adapted examination protocols for reduction of radiation exposure in chest CT.
    Wildberger JE; Mahnken AH; Schmitz-Rode T; Flohr T; Stargardt A; Haage P; Schaller S; Günther RW
    Invest Radiol; 2001 Oct; 36(10):604-11. PubMed ID: 11577271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Comparative evaluation of organ and effective doses for paediatric patients with those for adults in chest and abdominal CT examinations.
    Fujii K; Aoyama T; Koyama S; Kawaura C
    Br J Radiol; 2007 Aug; 80(956):657-67. PubMed ID: 17762056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The effects of patient positioning when interpreting CT dose metrics: A phantom study.
    Marsh RM; Silosky MS
    Med Phys; 2017 Apr; 44(4):1514-1524. PubMed ID: 28133763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.