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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1842243)

  • 1. [Perceptibility of details in conventional and digital teleradiography--a comparative study].
    Ruppenthal T; Doll G; Sergl HG; Fricke B
    Orthod Fr; 1991; 62 Pt 3():1033-42. PubMed ID: 1842243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of the accuracy of cephalometric landmark location between two screen/film combinations.
    Stirrups DR
    Angle Orthod; 1989; 59(3):211-5. PubMed ID: 2774297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [A comparative study of the possibility of reducing the dosage in lateral teleradiographs].
    Ruppenthal T; Fricke B; Sergl HG; Doll G
    Fortschr Kieferorthop; 1992 Feb; 53(1):40-8. PubMed ID: 1551627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Exposure reduction in cephalometric radiology: a comprehensive approach.
    Tyndall DA; Matteson SR; Soltmann RE; Hamilton TL; Proffit WR
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1988 May; 93(5):400-12. PubMed ID: 3163219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [Digital image intensifier radiography--one year's experience with a Polytron system].
    Busch HP; Lehmann KJ; Georgi M
    Rofo; 1989 Sep; 151(3):268-73. PubMed ID: 2552516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A study of dose reduction using digital luminescence radiography for lateral skull radiography.
    Seifert H; Kubale R; Hagen T; Kramann B; Leetz HK
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Apr; 69(820):311-7. PubMed ID: 8665130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiographs, Part 2: Image quality.
    Forsyth DB; Shaw WC; Richmond S; Roberts CT
    Angle Orthod; 1996; 66(1):43-50. PubMed ID: 8678345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of rare earth intensifying screens in cephalometric radiography.
    Stathopoulos V; Poulton DR
    Angle Orthod; 1990; 60(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 2180348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Variance of landmarks in digital evaluations: comparison between CT-based and conventional digital lateral cephalometric radiographs.
    Greiner M; Greiner A; Hirschfelder U
    J Orofac Orthop; 2007 Jul; 68(4):290-8. PubMed ID: 17639277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [The value of digital imaging techniques in skeletal imaging].
    Lehmann KJ; Busch HP; Sommer A; Georgi M
    Rofo; 1991 Mar; 154(3):286-91. PubMed ID: 1849297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Radiation dose reduction in panoramic radiography. Orthopantomograph Model OP 3 modified for rare earth intensifying screens.
    Forsgren L; Julin P
    Swed Dent J; 1982; 6(6):225-31. PubMed ID: 6963005
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Dose reduction in lateral cephalometry using rare-earth screens.
    Hutton JB; Brennan AG; Bird PD
    Br Dent J; 1987 Dec; 163(12):378-82. PubMed ID: 3480732
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Faster screen/film combinations for cephalometric radiography.
    Hurlburt CE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1981 Dec; 52(6):661-5. PubMed ID: 6947192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography.
    Bacher K; Smeets P; Bonnarens K; De Hauwere A; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Oct; 181(4):923-9. PubMed ID: 14500203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Digital cephalometric teleradiography with storage phosphors. Comparative study].
    Nessi R; Garattini G; Blanc M; Marzano L; Pignanelli C; Uslenghi C
    Radiol Med; 1993 Apr; 85(4):389-93. PubMed ID: 8516464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Screen-film versus digital radiography of sacroiliac joints: evaluation of image quality and dose to patients.
    Jablanovic D; Ciraj-Bjelac O; Damjanov N; Seric S; Radak-Perovic M; Arandjic D; Maksimovic R
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Jun; 155(1):88-95. PubMed ID: 23185070
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Radiation exposure in abdominal radiography with digital luminescence radiography and conventional screen-film system: an experimental animal study].
    Seifert H; Schneider G; Kubale R; Blass G; Kramann B; Leetz HK
    Rofo; 1996 Oct; 165(4):386-91. PubMed ID: 8963053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical comparison of conventional and rare earth screen-film systems for cephalometric radiographs.
    Kaugars GE; Fatouros P
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1982 Mar; 53(3):322-5. PubMed ID: 6950349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [The clinical evaluation of cephalograms using the single screen/single emulsion film system for improving image quality].
    Tanimoto K; Yamada K; Kodera Y; Imagawa H; Yoneda H; Sunayashiki T; Ogawa M; Wada T; Yamauchi K
    Nihon Kyosei Shika Gakkai Zasshi; 1986 Mar; 45(1):48-55. PubMed ID: 3458848
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Direct digital radiography in the dental office.
    Wenzel A; Gröndahl HG
    Int Dent J; 1995 Feb; 45(1):27-34. PubMed ID: 7607741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.