202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19700533)
1. Effect of image compression of digital lateral cephalograms on the reproducibility of cephalometric points.
Duarte H; Vieck R; Siqueira DF; Angelieri F; Bommarito S; Dalben G; Sannomiya EK
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Sep; 38(6):393-400. PubMed ID: 19700533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effect of image compression of direct digital lateral cephalograms on the identification of cephalometric points.
Saghaie S; Ghaffari R
Dent Res J (Isfahan); 2014 Jan; 11(1):27-31. PubMed ID: 24688556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of JPEG2000 compression on landmark identification of lateral cephalometric digital radiographs.
Abdelkarim A; Nummikoski P; Gakunga P; Hatch JP; Dove SB
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Oct; 138(4):518-524. PubMed ID: 20889059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of scanned lateral cephalograms with corresponding original radiographs.
Bruntz LQ; Palomo JM; Baden S; Hans MG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Sep; 130(3):340-8. PubMed ID: 16979492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Direct digital lateral cephalometry: the effects of JPEG compression on image quality.
Wenger NA; Tewson DH; McDonald F
Med Eng Phys; 2006 Jul; 28(6):560-7. PubMed ID: 16290207
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Reliability of landmark identification in cephalometric radiography acquired by a storage phosphor imaging system.
Chen YJ; Chen SK; Huang HW; Yao CC; Chang HF
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Sep; 33(5):301-6. PubMed ID: 15585806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effects of image enhancement on reliability of landmark identification in digital cephalometry.
Oshagh M; Shahidi SH; Danaei SH
Indian J Dent Res; 2013; 24(1):98-103. PubMed ID: 23852241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reproducibility of and file format effect on digital subtraction radiography of simulated external root resorptions.
Gegler A; Mahl C; Fontanella V
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 Jan; 35(1):10-3. PubMed ID: 16421257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of measurements from photographed lateral cephalograms and scanned cephalograms.
Collins J; Shah A; McCarthy C; Sandler J
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Dec; 132(6):830-3. PubMed ID: 18068604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prospective study on the reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional and digital lateral headfilms.
Hagemann K; Vollmer D; Niegel T; Ehmer U; Reuter I
J Orofac Orthop; 2000; 61(2):91-9. PubMed ID: 10783561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The effects of different image file formats and image-analysis software programs on dental radiometric digital evaluations.
Gürdal P; Hildebolt CF; Akdeniz BG
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 Jan; 30(1):50-5. PubMed ID: 11175274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Precision of cephalometric analysis via fully and semiautomatic evaluation of digital lateral cephalographs.
Sommer T; Ciesielski R; Erbersdobler J; Orthuber W; Fischer-Brandies H
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Sep; 38(6):401-6. PubMed ID: 19700534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Landmark identification on direct digital versus film-based cephalometric radiographs: a human skull study.
Schulze RK; Gloede MB; Doll GM
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2002 Dec; 122(6):635-42. PubMed ID: 12490875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Are orthodontic landmarks and variables in digital cephalometric radiography taken in fixed and natural head positions reliable?
Giannopoulou MA; Kondylidou-Sidira AC; Papadopoulos MA; Athanasiou AE
Int Orthod; 2020 Mar; 18(1):54-68. PubMed ID: 31495758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Analysis of low-dose digital lateral cephalometric radiographs.
Näslund EB; Kruger M; Petersson A; Hansen K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 May; 27(3):136-9. PubMed ID: 9693525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reliability of landmark identification on monitor-displayed lateral cephalometric images.
Yu SH; Nahm DS; Baek SH
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Jun; 133(6):790.e1-6; discussion e1. PubMed ID: 18538235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed images obtained by the storage phosphor technique.
Geelen W; Wenzel A; Gotfredsen E; Kruger M; Hansson LG
Eur J Orthod; 1998 Jun; 20(3):331-40. PubMed ID: 9699411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Fully Automatic System for Accurate Localisation and Analysis of Cephalometric Landmarks in Lateral Cephalograms.
Lindner C; Wang CW; Huang CT; Li CH; Chang SW; Cootes TF
Sci Rep; 2016 Sep; 6():33581. PubMed ID: 27645567
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings.
Sayinsu K; Isik F; Trakyali G; Arun T
Eur J Orthod; 2007 Feb; 29(1):105-8. PubMed ID: 17290023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Image compression in morphometry studies requiring 21 CFR Part 11 compliance: procedure is key with TIFFs and various JPEG compression strengths.
Tengowski MW
Toxicol Pathol; 2004; 32(2):258-63. PubMed ID: 15200165
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
