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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20306098)

  • 1. Ink-jet printout of radiographs on transparent film and glossy paper versus monitor display: an ROC analysis.
    Kühl S; Krummenauer F; Dagassan-Berndt D; Lambrecht TJ; d'Hoedt B; Schulze RK
    Clin Oral Investig; 2011 Jun; 15(3):351-6. PubMed ID: 20306098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Diagnostic yield of ink-jet prints from digital radiographs for the assessment of approximal carious lesions: ROC-analysis.
    Schulze RK; Grimm S; Schulze D; Voss K; Keller HP; Wedel M
    Eur J Radiol; 2011 Aug; 79(2):277-82. PubMed ID: 20185261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Quality of individually calibrated customary printers for assessment of typical dental diagnoses on glossy paper prints: a multicenter pilot study.
    Schulze RK; Schulze D; Voss K; Rottner M; Keller HP; Dollmann K; Maager B; Wedel M
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2008 Oct; 106(4):578-86. PubMed ID: 18299235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Subjective image quality of digital panoramic radiographs displayed on monitor and printed on various hardcopy media.
    Gijbels F; Sanderink G; Pauwels H; Jacobs R
    Clin Oral Investig; 2004 Mar; 8(1):25-9. PubMed ID: 14652733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of digital panoramic images displayed on monitor, glossy paper, and film for assessment of mandibular third molars.
    Benediktsdóttir IS; Wenzel A
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2004 Aug; 98(2):217-22. PubMed ID: 15316548
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Evaluation of the image quality of ink-jet printed paper copies of digital chest radiographs as compared with film: a receiver operating characteristic study.
    Lyttkens K; Kirkhorn T; Kehler M; Andersson B; Ebbesen A; Hochbergs P; Jarlman O; Lindberg CG; Holmer NG
    J Digit Imaging; 1994 May; 7(2):61-8. PubMed ID: 8075185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The influence of ambient lighting on the detection of small contrast elements in digital dental radiographs.
    Schriewer T; Schulze R; Filippi A; Mischak I; Payer M; Dagassan-Berndt D; Kühl S
    Clin Oral Investig; 2013 Sep; 17(7):1727-31. PubMed ID: 23053708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. In vitro perception of low-contrast features in digital, film, and digitized dental radiographs: a receiver operating characteristic analysis.
    Grassl U; Schulze RK
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2007 May; 103(5):694-701. PubMed ID: 17466887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessing the accuracy of caries diagnosis via radiograph. Film versus print.
    Otis LL; Sherman RG
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2005 Mar; 136(3):323-30. PubMed ID: 15819345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Assessing the image quality of a CCD-based digital intraoral radiography system: application of perceptibility curve test.
    Hayakawa Y; Kitagawa H; Wakoh M; Kuroyanagi K; Welander U
    Bull Tokyo Dent Coll; 2000 Feb; 41(1):9-14. PubMed ID: 11212381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Demonstration of digital radiographs by means of ink jet-printed paper copies: pilot study.
    Kirkhorn T; Kehler M; Nilsson J; Lyttkens K; Andersson B; Holmer NG
    J Digit Imaging; 1992 Nov; 5(4):246-51. PubMed ID: 1457540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessment of image quality in dental radiography, part 1: phantom validity.
    Yoshiura K; Kawazu T; Chikui T; Tatsumi M; Tokumori K; Tanaka T; Kanda S
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1999 Jan; 87(1):115-22. PubMed ID: 9927090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Digital camera resolution and proximal caries detection.
    Prapayasatok S; Janhom A; Verochana K; Pramojanee S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2006 Jul; 35(4):253-7. PubMed ID: 16798921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Influence of displayed image size on radiographic detection of approximal caries.
    Haak R; Wicht MJ; Nowak G; Hellmich M
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Jul; 32(4):242-6. PubMed ID: 13679355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of film and monitor display luminance on observer performance and visual search.
    Krupinski E; Roehrig H; Furukawa T
    Acad Radiol; 1999 Jul; 6(7):411-8. PubMed ID: 10410166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Using receiver operating characteristic methodology to evaluate the diagnostic quality of radiography on paper prints versus film.
    Bley TA; Kotter E; Saueressig U; Springer OS; Fisch D; Ghanem NA; Langer M
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Dec; 181(6):1487-90. PubMed ID: 14627560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Contrast perception in digitized panoramic radiographs compared with their film-based origin.
    Schulze RK; Rosing ST; D'Hoedt B
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2002 Sep; 94(3):388-94. PubMed ID: 12324798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of Kodak Ektaspeed Plus film and the Siemens Sidexis digital imaging system for caries detection using receiver operating characteristic analysis.
    Tyndall DA; Ludlow JB; Platin E; Nair M
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Jan; 85(1):113-8. PubMed ID: 9474625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of a cathode-ray-tube and film for display of computed radiographic images.
    Cook LT; Cox GG; Insana MF; McFadden MA; Hall TJ; Gaborski RS; Lure FY
    Med Phys; 1998 Jul; 25(7 Pt 1):1132-8. PubMed ID: 9682198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.