211 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2180348)
1. Evaluation of rare earth intensifying screens in cephalometric radiography.
Stathopoulos V; Poulton DR
Angle Orthod; 1990; 60(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 2180348
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comparative evaluation of rare-earth screen-film systems. System speed, contrast, sensitometry, RMS noise, square-wave response function, and contrast-dose-detail analysis.
Fearon T; Vucich J; Hoe J; McSweeney WJ; Potter BM
Invest Radiol; 1986 Aug; 21(8):654-62. PubMed ID: 3744739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Plain radiography with a rare-earth screen: comparison with calcium tungstate screen.
Picus D; McAlister WH; Smith E; Rodewald S; Jost RG; Evens RG
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1984 Dec; 143(6):1335-8. PubMed ID: 6333800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Rare-earth screens versus calcium tungstate screens.
Wilson RA
Radiology; 1983 Apr; 147(1):288-9. PubMed ID: 6828754
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Rare earth screens for panoramic radiography.
Hurlburt CE; Coggins LJ
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1984 Apr; 57(4):451-4. PubMed ID: 6584845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [A new rare earth intensifying screen: lanthanum oxybromide (Quanta III - Dupont): relative speed, resolution and image quality (author's transl)].
Bergamini C; Laudicina L; Marengo M; Pavlica P; Viglietta G; Zanini M
Radiol Med; 1980 Oct; 66(10):699-704. PubMed ID: 7221029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Dose efficiency of screen-film systems used in pediatric radiography.
Cohen G; Wagner LK; McDaniel DL; Robinson LH
Radiology; 1984 Jul; 152(1):187-93. PubMed ID: 6729110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical comparison of high-speed rare-earth screen and par-speed screen for diagnostic efficacy and radiation dosage.
Robinson T; Becker JA; Olson AP
Radiology; 1982 Oct; 145(1):214-6. PubMed ID: 6821592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Comparative study of screen-film combinations used in conventional radiography].
Malchair F; Longtain F; Gordenne W
J Belge Radiol; 1988; 71(4):451-6. PubMed ID: 3215896
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of image quality on the identification of cephalometric landmarks.
McWilliam JS; Welander U
Angle Orthod; 1978 Jan; 48(1):49-56. PubMed ID: 272131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The evaluation of high-speed screen/film combinations in cephalometric radiography.
Kimura K; Langland OE; Biggerstaff RH
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1987 Dec; 92(6):484-91. PubMed ID: 3479894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Exposure reduction in cephalometric radiology: a comprehensive approach.
Tyndall DA; Matteson SR; Soltmann RE; Hamilton TL; Proffit WR
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1988 May; 93(5):400-12. PubMed ID: 3163219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Clinical comparison of conventional and rare earth screen-film systems for cephalometric radiographs.
Kaugars GE; Fatouros P
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1982 Mar; 53(3):322-5. PubMed ID: 6950349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Rare-earth and calcium tungstate intensifying screens, a comparative study of relative speed, radiation doses and resolving power.
de Carvalho A; Jørgensen J
Rofo; 1978 Mar; 128(3):358-63. PubMed ID: 147838
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Reduction of radiation dosage by the use of newer reinforced rare earth films].
Hofmann T
Inf Orthod Kieferorthop; 1987; 19(1):107-10. PubMed ID: 3474210
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. [X-ray intensifying screens: their effect on the quality of the image and the degree of irradiation].
Tombak MI; Vlasov PV; Gurvich AM; Gurevich IA; Katomina RV
Vestn Rentgenol Radiol; 1984; (5):80-4. PubMed ID: 6528468
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of x-radiation doses between conventional and rare earth panoramic radiographic techniques.
Skoczylas LJ; Preece JW; Langlais RP; McDavid WD; Waggener RG
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Dec; 68(6):776-81. PubMed ID: 2594329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparison of the accuracy of cephalometric landmark location between two screen/film combinations.
Stirrups DR
Angle Orthod; 1989; 59(3):211-5. PubMed ID: 2774297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Accuracy of cephalometric landmarks on monitor-displayed radiographs with and without image emboss enhancement.
Leonardi RM; Giordano D; Maiorana F; Greco M
Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 20022892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Faster screen/film combinations for cephalometric radiography.
Hurlburt CE
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1981 Dec; 52(6):661-5. PubMed ID: 6947192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
