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 *

86 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16437053)

  • 1. Acceptance testing of Computed Radiography systems.
    Riccardi L; Cauzzo MC; Fabbris R
    Radiol Med; 2005; 110(5-6):676-88. PubMed ID: 16437053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quantitative assessment of computed radiography quality control parameters.
    Rampado O; Isoardi P; Ropolo R
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Mar; 51(6):1577-93. PubMed ID: 16510964
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Image quality and patient dose in computed tomography examinations in Greece.
    Simantirakis G; Hourdakis CJ; Economides S; Dimitriou P
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):129-32. PubMed ID: 21743078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Performance evaluation of computed radiography systems.
    Samei E; Seibert JA; Willis CE; Flynn MJ; Mah E; Junck KL
    Med Phys; 2001 Mar; 28(3):361-71. PubMed ID: 11318318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Objective performance testing and quality assurance of medical ultrasound equipment.
    Thijssen JM; Weijers G; de Korte CL
    Ultrasound Med Biol; 2007 Mar; 33(3):460-71. PubMed ID: 17275983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Performance evaluation of an 85-cm-bore X-ray computed tomography scanner designed for radiation oncology and comparison with current diagnostic CT scanners.
    Garcia-Ramirez JL; Mutic S; Dempsey JF; Low DA; Purdy JA
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2002 Mar; 52(4):1123-31. PubMed ID: 11958910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Quality control of a kV cone beam computed tomography imaging system].
    Marguet M; Bodez V
    Cancer Radiother; 2009 Sep; 13(5):345-52. PubMed ID: 19615928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accuracy comparison of a 16 and 64 multidetector-row computed tomography scanner to image small high-density structures.
    Rollano-Hijarrubia E; Stokking R; Niessen WJ
    Invest Radiol; 2006 Nov; 41(11):781-92. PubMed ID: 17035868
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Review of image quality standards to control digital X-ray systems.
    Schreiner-Karoussou A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):23-5. PubMed ID: 16464831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A quality assurance phantom for the performance evaluation of volumetric micro-CT systems.
    Du LY; Umoh J; Nikolov HN; Pollmann SI; Lee TY; Holdsworth DW
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Dec; 52(23):7087-108. PubMed ID: 18029995
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An examination of automatic exposure control regimes for two digital radiography systems.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2009 Aug; 54(15):4645-70. PubMed ID: 19590115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Quality assurance of computed and digital radiography systems.
    Walsh C; Gorman D; Byrne P; Larkin A; Dowling A; Malone JF
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):271-5. PubMed ID: 18319281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Exposure variability and image quality in computed radiography.
    Fauber TL
    Radiol Technol; 2009; 80(3):209-15. PubMed ID: 19153197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of three generations of electron beam tomography on image noise and reproducibility, a phantom study.
    Chau A; Gopal A; Mao S; Tseng PH; Fischer H; Budoff MJ
    Invest Radiol; 2006 Jun; 41(6):522-6. PubMed ID: 16763471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Geometric accuracy of digital volume tomography and conventional computed tomography.
    Eggers G; Klein J; Welzel T; Mühling J
    Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2008 Dec; 46(8):639-44. PubMed ID: 18490090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Spiral imaging artifact reduction: a comparison of two k-trajectory measurement methods.
    Lechner SM; Sipilä PT; Wiesinger F; Kerr AB; Vogel MW
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2009 Jun; 29(6):1485-92. PubMed ID: 19472426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quality control protocol for in vitro micro-computed tomography.
    Stoico R; Tassani S; Perilli E; Baruffaldi F; Viceconti M
    J Microsc; 2010 May; 238(2):162-72. PubMed ID: 20529063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Quality control of megavoltage cone beam CT imaging system].
    Isambert A; Ferreira IH; Nicula LE; Bonniaud G; Lefkopoulos D
    Cancer Radiother; 2008 Dec; 12(8):781-7. PubMed ID: 18691926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An optimization-based method for geometrical calibration in cone-beam CT without dedicated phantoms.
    Panetta D; Belcari N; Del Guerra A; Moehrs S
    Phys Med Biol; 2008 Jul; 53(14):3841-61. PubMed ID: 18583729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Physical evaluation of the weighted Feldkamp algorithms applied to the 256-detector row CT scanner for volumetric cine imaging.
    Mori S; Endo M; Kondo C; Tanada S
    Acad Radiol; 2006 Jun; 13(6):701-12. PubMed ID: 16679272
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.