177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18204082)
21. Evaluation of dose area product vs. patient dose in diagnostic X-ray units.
Kisielewicz K; Truszkiewicz A; Wach S; Wasilewska-Radwańska M
Phys Med; 2011 Apr; 27(2):117-20. PubMed ID: 20674429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Investigation of dose reduction in neonatal radiography using specially designed phantoms and LiF:Mg,Cu,P TLDs.
Duggan L; Warren-Forward H; Smith T; Kron T
Br J Radiol; 2003 Apr; 76(904):232-7. PubMed ID: 12711642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Comparison of four methods for assessing patient effective dose from radiological examinations.
Theocharopoulos N; Perisinakis K; Damilakis J; Varveris H; Gourtsoyiannis N
Med Phys; 2002 Sep; 29(9):2070-9. PubMed ID: 12349928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Radiographic and fluoroscopic X-ray systems: Quality control of the X-ray tube and automatic exposure control using theoretical spectra to determine air kerma and dose to a homogenous phantom.
Konst B; Nøtthellen J; Bilet E; Båth M
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2021 Aug; 22(8):204-218. PubMed ID: 34196461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Estimating pediatric entrance skin dose from digital radiography examination using DICOM metadata: A quality assurance tool.
Brady SL; Kaufman RA
Med Phys; 2015 May; 42(5):2489-97. PubMed ID: 25979042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Studying the dose level for different X-ray energy conventional radiography by TLD-100.
Ghoneam SM; Mahmoud KR; Diab HM; El-Sersy A
Appl Radiat Isot; 2022 Mar; 181():110066. PubMed ID: 34968881
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Analysis of QUADOS problem on TLD-ALBEDO personal dosemeter responses using discrete ordinates and Monte Carlo methods.
Kodeli I; Tanner R
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 115(1-4):542-7. PubMed ID: 16381782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Dosimetry of MammoSite® applicator: comparison between Monte Carlo simulation, measurements, and treatment planning calculation.
Oshaghi M; Sadeghi M; Mahdavi SR; Shirazi A
J Cancer Res Ther; 2013; 9(2):224-9. PubMed ID: 23771363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Dosimetry methods for multi-detector computed tomography.
Gancheva M; Dyakov I; Vassileva J; Avramova-Cholakova S; Taseva D
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Jul; 165(1-4):190-3. PubMed ID: 25889607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. An investigation of backscatter factors for kilovoltage x-rays: a comparison between Monte Carlo simulations and Gafchromic EBT film measurements.
Kim J; Hill R; Claridge Mackonis E; Kuncic Z
Phys Med Biol; 2010 Feb; 55(3):783-97. PubMed ID: 20071763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The low energy X-ray response of the LiF:Mg:Cu:P thermoluminescent dosemeter: a comparison with LiF:Mg:Ti.
Edwards CR; Mountford PJ; Green S; Palethorpe JE; Moloney AJ
Br J Radiol; 2005 Jun; 78(930):543-7. PubMed ID: 15900061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Calculated energy response correction factors for LiF thermoluminescent dosemeters employed in the seventh EULEP dosimetry intercomparison.
Zoetelief J; Jansen JT
Phys Med Biol; 1997 Aug; 42(8):1491-504. PubMed ID: 9279901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Influence of distant scatterer on air kerma measurement in the evaluation of diagnostic X-rays using Monte Carlo simulation.
Tominaga M; Nagayasu Y; Sasaki M; Furuta T; Hayashi H; Oita M; Nishiyama Y; Haga A
Radiol Phys Technol; 2021 Dec; 14(4):381-389. PubMed ID: 34716568
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Energy responses of the LiF series TL pellets to high-energy photons in the energy range from 1.25 to 21 MV.
Kim JL; Lee JI; Ji YH; Kim BH; Kim JS; Chang SY
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 119(1-4):353-6. PubMed ID: 16644960
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Entrance dose measurement: a simple and reliable technique.
Banjade DP; Raj TA; Ng BS; Xavier S; Tajuddin AA; Shukri A
Med Dosim; 2003; 28(2):73-8. PubMed ID: 12804703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. The effect of breast shielding outside the field of view on breast entrance surface dose in axial X-ray examinations: a phantom study.
Hurley L; Alashban Y; Albeshan S; England A; McEntee MF
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2023 May; 29(3):555-560. PubMed ID: 37129301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Measurements of gamma dose and thermal neutron fluence in phantoms exposed to a BNCT epithermal beam with TLD-700.
Gambarini G; Magni D; Regazzoni V; Borroni M; Carrara M; Pignoli E; Burian J; Marek M; Klupak V; Viererbl L
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2014 Oct; 161(1-4):422-7. PubMed ID: 24435913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Radiation dose considerations in common paediatric X-ray examinations.
Gogos KA; Yakoumakis EN; Tsalafoutas IA; Makri TK
Pediatr Radiol; 2003 Apr; 33(4):236-40. PubMed ID: 12709751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Feasibility study of entrance in vivo dose measurements with mailed thermoluminescence detectors.
Swinnen A; Verstraete J; Huyskens DP
Radiother Oncol; 2004 Oct; 73(1):89-96. PubMed ID: 15465151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Determination of the weighted CT dose index in modern multi-detector CT scanners.
Perisinakis K; Damilakis J; Tzedakis A; Papadakis A; Theocharopoulos N; Gourtsoyiannis N
Phys Med Biol; 2007 Nov; 52(21):6485-95. PubMed ID: 17951857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
