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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20159914)

  • 21. [Digital storage phosphor radiography. Doses and image quality].
    Salvini E; Pedroli G; Montanari G; Pastori R; Crespi A; Zincone G
    Radiol Med; 1994 Jun; 87(6):847-51. PubMed ID: 8041940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The assessment of image quality and diagnostic value in X-ray images: a survey on radiographers' reasons for rejecting images.
    Kjelle E; Chilanga C
    Insights Imaging; 2022 Mar; 13(1):36. PubMed ID: 35244800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Image rejects in digital skeletal radiography in two public hospitals in Norway.
    Hofmann B
    Radiography (Lond); 2023 Oct; 29(6):1063-1067. PubMed ID: 37741144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Influence of gender, age, and social norm on digital imaging use.
    Kowalczyk N
    Radiol Technol; 2012; 83(5):437-46. PubMed ID: 22596022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Image retake analysis in digital radiography using DICOM header information.
    Prieto C; Vano E; Ten JI; Fernandez JM; Iñiguez AI; Arevalo N; Litcheva A; Crespo E; Floriano A; Martinez D
    J Digit Imaging; 2009 Aug; 22(4):393-9. PubMed ID: 18592314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The lateral wrist radiograph - To retake or not to retake.
    Mussmann BR; Milner R; Barlow N; Jensen J
    Radiography (Lond); 2023 Jan; 29(1):119-123. PubMed ID: 36347134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. RADIUS--closing the circle on the assessment of imaging performance.
    Moores BM; Mattsson S; Månsson LG; Panzer W; Regulla D; Dance D; Alm Carlsson G; Verdun FR; Buhr E; Hoeschen C
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):450-7. PubMed ID: 15933154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Digital chest radiography.
    MacMahon H; Doi K
    Clin Chest Med; 1991 Mar; 12(1):19-32. PubMed ID: 2009743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Reject analysis in digital radiography: A local study on radiographers and students' attitude in Iran.
    Rastegar S; Beigi J; Saeidi E; Dezhkam A; Mobaderi T; Ghaffari H; Mehdipour A; Abdollahi H
    Med J Islam Repub Iran; 2019; 33():49. PubMed ID: 31456973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. [An economic comparison between digital luminescence radiography and conventional film processing in intensive care medicine].
    Peters PE; Dykstra DE; Wiesmann W; Schlüchtermann J; Adam D
    Radiologe; 1992 Nov; 32(11):536-40. PubMed ID: 1461981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Pre-clinical performance comparing intraoral film and CCD-based systems.
    Sommers TM; Mauriello SM; Ludlow JB; Platin E; Tyndall DA
    J Dent Hyg; 2002; 76(1):26-33. PubMed ID: 11935928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Unified Database for Rejected Image Analysis Across Multiple Vendors in Radiography.
    Little KJ; Reiser I; Liu L; Kinsey T; Sánchez AA; Haas K; Mallory F; Froman C; Lu ZF
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2017 Feb; 14(2):208-216. PubMed ID: 27663061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Subjective and objective measures of image quality in digital fluoroscopy.
    Walsh C; Dowling A; Meade A; Malone J
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):34-7. PubMed ID: 16461534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of technical and anatomical noise in digital thorax X-ray images.
    Hoeschen C; Tischenko O; Buhr E; Illers H
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):75-80. PubMed ID: 15933084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Dental digital radiography: a survey of quality aspects.
    Hellén-Halme K; Rohlin M; Petersson A
    Swed Dent J; 2005; 29(2):81-7. PubMed ID: 16035351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. An investigation of Saudi Arabian MR radiographers' knowledge and confidence in relation to MR image-quality-related errors.
    Alsharif W; Davis M; McGee A; Rainford L
    Radiography (Lond); 2017 May; 23(2):e27-e33. PubMed ID: 28390556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Computer-aided image manipulation of intraoral radiographs to enhance diagnosis in dental practice: a review.
    Wenzel A
    Int Dent J; 1993 Apr; 43(2):99-108. PubMed ID: 8320010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. 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]  

  • 39. Digital radiography reject analysis of examinations with multiple rejects: an Australian emergency imaging department clinical audit.
    Stephenson-Smith B; Neep MJ; Rowntree P
    J Med Radiat Sci; 2021 Sep; 68(3):245-252. PubMed ID: 33826800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Digital radiography image quality: image acquisition.
    Williams MB; Krupinski EA; Strauss KJ; Breeden WK; Rzeszotarski MS; Applegate K; Wyatt M; Bjork S; Seibert JA
    J Am Coll Radiol; 2007 Jun; 4(6):371-88. PubMed ID: 17544139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.