BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

264 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16461488)

  • 1. Performance evaluation and testing of digital intra-oral radiographic systems.
    Doyle P; Finney L
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):313-7. PubMed ID: 16461488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Signal-to-noise ratios of 6 intraoral digital sensors.
    Attaelmanan AG; Borg E; Gröndahl HG
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 May; 91(5):611-5. PubMed ID: 11346743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Chest radiography: a comparison of image quality and effective dose using four digital systems.
    Pascoal A; Lawinski CP; Mackenzie A; Tabakov S; Lewis CA
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):273-7. PubMed ID: 15933121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Physical evaluation of prototype high-performance anti-scatter grids: potential for improved digital radiographic image quality.
    Fetterly KA; Schueler BA
    Phys Med Biol; 2009 Jan; 54(2):N37-42. PubMed ID: 19098352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Is digital better in dental radiography?
    Zdesar U; Fortuna T; Valantic B; Skrk D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):138-9. PubMed ID: 18375462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The application of image quality measurements for digital angiography.
    Peterzol A; Padovani R; Quai E; Vano E; Prieto C; Aviles P
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):38-43. PubMed ID: 16461533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Radiographic quality control devices.
    Health Devices; 2000 Apr; 29(4):97-139. PubMed ID: 11002439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Subjective image quality of solid-state and photostimulable phosphor systems for digital intra-oral radiography.
    Borg E; Attaelmanan A; Gröndahl HG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Mar; 29(2):70-5. PubMed ID: 10808218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An objective comparison of four digital intra-oral radiographic systems: sensitometric properties and resolution.
    Araki K; Endo A; Okano T
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Mar; 29(2):76-80. PubMed ID: 10808219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Dose performance evaluation of a charge coupled device and a flat-panel digital fluoroscopy system recently installed in an interventional cardiology laboratory.
    Tsapaki V; Kottou S; Kollaros N; Dafnomili P; Kyriakidis Z; Neofotistou V
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2004; 111(3):297-304. PubMed ID: 15266080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of K-shell absorption edge filters on image quality in digital intraoral radiography.
    Shibuya H; Nishikawa K; Kuroyanagi K
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2000 Sep; 90(3):377-84. PubMed ID: 10982962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation and testing of computed radiography systems.
    Charnock P; Connolly PA; Hughes D; Moores BM
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):201-7. PubMed ID: 15933109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of a photostimulable phosphor system with film for dental radiology.
    Huda W; Rill LN; Benn DK; Pettigrew JC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1997 Jun; 83(6):725-31. PubMed ID: 9195631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Technical advances of interventional fluoroscopy and flat panel image receptor.
    Lin PJ
    Health Phys; 2008 Nov; 95(5):650-7. PubMed ID: 18849699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evaluating phantom image quality parameters to optimise patient radiation dose in dental digital radiology.
    Gonzalez L; Vano E; Fernandez R; Ziraldo V; Delgado J; Delgado V; Moro J; Ubeda C
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Aug; 151(1):95-101. PubMed ID: 22232776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Intraoral radiology in general dental practices - a comparison of digital and film-based X-ray systems with regard to radiation protection and dose reduction.
    Anissi HD; Geibel MA
    Rofo; 2014 Aug; 186(8):762-7. PubMed ID: 24648236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Physical image quality comparison of four types of digital detector for chest radiology.
    Fernandez JM; Ordiales JM; Guibelalde E; Prieto C; Vano E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):140-3. PubMed ID: 18283060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Acceptance testing and routine quality control in general radiography: mobile units and film/screen fixed systems.
    Gray L; Dowling A; Gallagher A; Gorman D; O'Connor U; Devine M; Larkin A; Walsh C; Malone JF
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):276-8. PubMed ID: 18326885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Analysis of image quality in digital chest imaging.
    De Hauwere A; Bacher K; Smeets P; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):174-7. PubMed ID: 16461499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.