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 *

46 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20111456)

  • 1. Image evaluation.
    Bray CP
    Appl Opt; 1972 Jan; 11(1):58-9. PubMed ID: 20111456
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quantitative evaluation of elderly skin based on digital image analysis.
    Tanaka H; Nakagami G; Sanada H; Sari Y; Kobayashi H; Kishi K; Konya C; Tadaka E
    Skin Res Technol; 2008 May; 14(2):192-200. PubMed ID: 18412562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Review of evaluation techniques for medical image reconstruction].
    Yu H; Mu X; Cai Y
    Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2003 Mar; 20(1):162-6, 170. PubMed ID: 12744190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy test procedure for image evaluation techniques.
    Jones RA
    Appl Opt; 1968 Jan; 7(1):133-6. PubMed ID: 20062421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A reference data set for the evaluation of medical image retrieval systems.
    Müller H; Rosset A; Vallée JP; Terrier F; Geissbuhler A
    Comput Med Imaging Graph; 2004 Sep; 28(6):295-305. PubMed ID: 15294308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. [A method of iris image quality evaluation].
    Murat H; Mao D; Tong Q
    Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2006 Apr; 23(2):275-8. PubMed ID: 16706346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Evaluation of video capture equipment for secondary image acquisition in the PACS.
    Sukenobu Y; Sasagaki M; Hirabuki N; Naito H; Narumi Y; Inamura K
    Igaku Butsuri; 2002; 22(4):276-86. PubMed ID: 12766273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Fear of negative appearance evaluation: development and evaluation of a new construct for risk factor work in the field of eating disorders.
    Lundgren JD; Anderson DA; Thompson JK
    Eat Behav; 2004 Jan; 5(1):75-84. PubMed ID: 15000956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Toward objective evaluation of image segmentation algorithms.
    Unnikrishnan R; Pantofaru C; Hebert M
    IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell; 2007 Jun; 29(6):929-44. PubMed ID: 17431294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Body image and exercise in people with and without acquired mobility disability.
    Yuen HK; Hanson C
    Disabil Rehabil; 2002 Apr; 24(6):289-96. PubMed ID: 12017462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Image analysis for the evaluation of p53 expression in human cancers.
    Faranda A; Silvestrini R; Canova S; Costa A
    Anal Cell Pathol; 1996 Jul; 11(2):107-13. PubMed ID: 8844108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. MR cholangiopancreatography at 3.0 T: intraindividual comparative study with MR cholangiopancreatography at 1.5 T for clinical patients.
    Onishi H; Kim T; Hori M; Murakami T; Tatsumi M; Nakaya Y; Nakamoto A; Osuga K; Tomoda K; Nakamura H
    Invest Radiol; 2009 Sep; 44(9):559-65. PubMed ID: 19692840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Clinical evaluation of a new set of image quality criteria for mammography.
    Grahn A; Hemdal B; Andersson I; Ruschin M; Thilander-Klang A; Börjesson S; Tingberg A; Mattsson S; Håkansson M; Båth M; Månsson LG; Medin J; Wanninger F; Panzer W
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):389-94. PubMed ID: 15933143
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Efficient cell segmentation tool for confocal microscopy tissue images and quantitative evaluation of FISH signals.
    Adiga PS; Chaudhuri BB
    Microsc Res Tech; 1999 Jan; 44(1):49-68. PubMed ID: 9915563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Longitudinal quantitative evaluation of lesion size change in femoral head osteonecrosis using three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging and image registration.
    Takao M; Sugano N; Nishii T; Miki H; Sato Y; Tamura S; Yoshikawa H
    J Orthop Res; 2006 Jun; 24(6):1231-9. PubMed ID: 16705706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Computerized image analysis of nails affected by fungal infection: evaluation using digital photographs and manually defined areas.
    Baran R; Sparavigna A; Setaro M; Mailland F
    J Drugs Dermatol; 2004; 3(5):489-94. PubMed ID: 15552601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quality assurance (QA) procedures for software: evaluation of an ADC quality system.
    Efstathopoulos EP; Benekos O; Molfetas M; Charou E; Kottou S; Argentos S; Kelekis NL
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):291-7. PubMed ID: 16464840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. MRI simulation-based evaluation of image-processing and classification methods.
    Kwan RK; Evans AC; Pike GB
    IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 1999 Nov; 18(11):1085-97. PubMed ID: 10661326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Holographic evaluation of fiber optics image transfer characteristics.
    Remijan PW
    Appl Opt; 1972 Dec; 11(12):2783-9. PubMed ID: 20119409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Digital image analysis versus clinical assessment of wound epithelialization: a validation study.
    Bloemen MC; Boekema BK; Vlig M; van Zuijlen PP; Middelkoop E
    Burns; 2012 Jun; 38(4):501-5. PubMed ID: 22381563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.