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 *

187 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16464831)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. Quality control of equipment used in digital and interventional radiology.
    Zoetelief J; van Soldt RT; Suliman II; Jansen JT; Bosmans H
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):277-82. PubMed ID: 16461518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Comparison of a CCD and a flat-panel digital system in an Interventional Cardiology Laboratory.
    Tsapaki V; Kottou S; Kollaros N; Kyriakidis Z; Neofotistou V
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):93-6. PubMed ID: 16461500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Investigation of possible methods for equipment self-tests in digital radiology.
    Zoetelief J; Idris HH; Jansen JT
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):269-73. PubMed ID: 16461526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Image quality measurements in radiology.
    Tapiovaara M
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):116-9. PubMed ID: 16461535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Patient dosimetry and image quality in digital radiology from online audit of the X-ray system.
    Vano E; Fernandez JM; Ten JI; Gonzalez L; Guibelalde E; Prieto C
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):199-203. PubMed ID: 16461529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Equipment standards for interventional cardiology.
    Dowling A; Gallagher A; Walsh C; Malone J
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):79-86. PubMed ID: 16461508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Image quality criteria in cardiology.
    Bernardi G; Padovani R; Spedicato L; Desmet W; Malisan MR; Giannuleas JD; Neofotistou E; Manginas A; Olivari Z; Cosgrave J; Alfonso F; Bosmans H; Dowling A; Vano E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):102-6. PubMed ID: 16461497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Importance of dose settings in the x-ray systems used for interventional radiology: a national survey.
    Vano E; Sanchez R; Fernandez JM; Rosales F; Garcia MA; Sotil J; Hernandez J; Carrera F; Ciudad J; Soler MM; Ballester T
    Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2009 Jan; 32(1):121-6. PubMed ID: 19052816
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Criteria to optimise a dynamic flat detector system used for interventional radiology.
    Simon R; Vano E; Prieto C; Fernandez JM; Ordiales JM; Martinez D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):261-4. PubMed ID: 18304958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quality criteria for cardiac images: an update.
    Bernardi G; Bar O; Jezewski T; Vano E; Maccia C; Trianni A; Padovani R
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):87-90. PubMed ID: 18283064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The impact of computer display performance on the quality of digital radiographs: a review.
    Butt A; Mahoney M; Savage NW
    Aust Dent J; 2012 Mar; 57 Suppl 1():16-23. PubMed ID: 22376093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Artifacts in digital mammography.
    Van Ongeval C; Jacobs J; Bosmans H
    JBR-BTR; 2008; 91(6):262-3. PubMed ID: 19203002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Calibrating automatic exposure control devices for digital radiography.
    Doyle P; Martin CJ
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Nov; 51(21):5475-85. PubMed ID: 17047264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Accuracy and feasibility of frameless stereotactic and robot-assisted CT-based puncture in interventional radiology: a comparative phantom study.
    Stoffner R; Augschöll C; Widmann G; Böhler D; Bale R
    Rofo; 2009 Sep; 181(9):851-8. PubMed ID: 19517342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Dual-energy cardiac imaging: an image quality and dose comparison for a flat-panel detector and x-ray image intensifier.
    Ducote JL; Xu T; Molloi S
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Jan; 52(1):183-96. PubMed ID: 17183135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.