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.
292 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19272812)
21. Image quality in digital radiographic systems. de Almeida SM; de Oliveira AE; Ferreira RI; Bóscolo FN Braz Dent J; 2003; 14(2):136-41. PubMed ID: 12964659 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Quality aspects of digital radiography in general dental practice. Hellén-Halme K Swed Dent J Suppl; 2007; (184):9-60. PubMed ID: 17645148 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Influence of spatial resolution and bit depth on detection of small caries lesions with digital receptors. Wenzel A; Haiter-Neto F; Gotfredsen E Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2007 Mar; 103(3):418-22. PubMed ID: 17321456 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. A comparative evaluation of the diagnostic efficacy of film and digital sensors for detection of simulated periapical lesions. Wallace JA; Nair MK; Colaco MF; Kapa SF Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Jul; 92(1):93-7. PubMed ID: 11458252 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Perceptibility curve test for digital radiographs before and after application of various image processing algorithms. Alpöz E; Soğur E; Baksi Akdeniz BG Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):490-4. PubMed ID: 18033946 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Effect of ambient light and bit depth of digital radiograph on observer performance in determination of endodontic file positioning. Heo MS; Han DH; An BM; Huh KH; Yi WJ; Lee SS; Choi SC Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Feb; 105(2):239-44. PubMed ID: 17604662 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparison of complementary metal oxide semiconductor and charge-coupled device intraoral X-ray detectors using subjective image quality. Kitagawa H; Scheetz JP; Farman AG Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Nov; 32(6):408-11. PubMed ID: 15070845 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A comparison of two intraoral CCD sensor systems in terms of image quality and interobserver agreement. Schulze D; Rother UJ; Fuhrmann AW; Tietke M Int J Comput Dent; 2003 Apr; 6(2):141-50. PubMed ID: 14552151 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Energy dependence of photostimulable phosphor. Chu RY; Christian EN; Eaton BG Radiol Technol; 2002; 73(4):299-304. PubMed ID: 11928163 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The digital revolution, images and X-rays. Emmott LF N Y State Dent J; 2005 Jan; 71(1):40-3. PubMed ID: 15768910 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Determination of the optimal conditions for dental subtraction radiography using a storage phosphor system. Brettle DS; Ellwood R; Davies R Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jan; 28(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 10202471 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Radiopacity evaluation of new root canal filling materials by digitalization of images. Tanomaru-Filho M; Jorge EG; Guerreiro Tanomaru JM; Gonçalves M J Endod; 2007 Mar; 33(3):249-51. PubMed ID: 17320706 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparison of landmark identification in traditional versus computer-aided digital cephalometry. Chen YJ; Chen SK; Chang HF; Chen KC Angle Orthod; 2000 Oct; 70(5):387-92. PubMed ID: 11036999 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Computed dental radiography used to reproduce antemortem film position. Hubar JS; Carr RF J Forensic Sci; 1999 Mar; 44(2):401-4. PubMed ID: 10097371 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Relationship between image information content and observer performance in digital intraoral radiography. Takarabe S; Okamura K; Kuramoto T; Tokumori K; Kato T; Yoshiura K Oral Radiol; 2023 Jul; 39(3):491-503. PubMed ID: 36289169 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]