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 *

175 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21831972)

  • 1. Evaluation of proximal caries in images resulting from different modes of radiographic digitalization.
    Xavier CR; Araujo-Pires AC; Poleti ML; Rubira-Bullen IR; Ferreira O; Capelozza AL
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2011 Sep; 40(6):338-43. PubMed ID: 21831972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Interaction between noise and file compression and its effect on the recognition of caries in digital imaging.
    Janhom A; van der Stelt PF; van Ginkel FC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Jan; 29(1):20-7. PubMed ID: 10654032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparison of two compression algorithms and the detection of caries.
    Janhom A; van der Stelt PF; Sanderink GC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Jul; 31(4):257-63. PubMed ID: 12087443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of the effects of postprocessing settings in digital bitewing radiographs on proximal caries detection.
    Abdinian M; Keshani F; Sadeghi F; Soltani P; Spagnuolo G; Rengo C
    Clin Exp Dent Res; 2024 Jun; 10(3):e889. PubMed ID: 38712390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of direct digital and conventional radiography for the detection of proximal surface caries in the mixed dentition.
    Uprichard KK; Potter BJ; Russell CM; Schafer TE; Adair S; Weller RN
    Pediatr Dent; 2000; 22(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 10730280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Influence of the file format and transmission app on the radiographic diagnosis of caries lesions.
    Madlum DV; Gaêta-Araujo H; Brasil DM; Lima CAS; Oliveira ML; Haiter-Neto F
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2021 Oct; 132(4):448-455. PubMed ID: 33386287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Scanning resolution and the detection of approximal caries.
    Janhom A; van Ginkel FC; van Amerongen JP; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 May; 30(3):166-71. PubMed ID: 11420630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of wavelet and discrete cosine transform compression of digital radiographs on the detection of subtle proximal caries. ROC analysis.
    Schulze RK; Richter A; d'Hoedt B
    Caries Res; 2008; 42(5):334-9. PubMed ID: 18701823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Influence of the validation method on diagnostic accuracy for caries. A comparison of six digital and two conventional radiographic systems.
    Hintze H; Wenzel A
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Jan; 31(1):44-9. PubMed ID: 11803388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Effect of noise on the compressibility and diagnostic accuracy for caries detection of digital bitewing radiographs.
    Janhom A; van der Stelt PF; van Ginkel FC; Geraets WG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jan; 28(1):6-12. PubMed ID: 10202472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Proximal caries detection accuracy using intraoral bitewing radiography, extraoral bitewing radiography and panoramic radiography.
    Kamburoglu K; Kolsuz E; Murat S; Yüksel S; Ozen T
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2012 Sep; 41(6):450-9. PubMed ID: 22868296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Radiographic detection of approximal caries: a comparison of dental films and digital imaging systems.
    Syriopoulos K; Sanderink GC; Velders XL; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Sep; 29(5):312-8. PubMed ID: 10980568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Performance of RVGui sensor and Kodak Ektaspeed Plus film for proximal caries detection.
    Abreu M; Mol A; Ludlow JB
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Mar; 91(3):381-5. PubMed ID: 11250640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of digital systems and conventional dental film for the detection of approximal enamel caries.
    Pontual AA; de Melo DP; de Almeida SM; Bóscolo FN; Haiter Neto F
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2010 Oct; 39(7):431-6. PubMed ID: 20841461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Intraoral versus extraoral bitewing radiography in detection of enamel proximal caries: an ex vivo study.
    Abu El-Ela WH; Farid MM; Mostafa MS
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2016; 45(4):20150326. PubMed ID: 26892946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effect of data compression on proximal caries detection: observer performance with DenOptix photostimulable phosphor images.
    Pabla T; Ludlow JB; Tyndall DA; Platin E; Abreu M
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Jan; 32(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 12820853
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An in-vitro evaluation of Kodak Insight and Ektaspeed Plus film with a CMOS detector for natural proximal caries: ROC analysis.
    Nair MK; Nair UP
    Caries Res; 2001; 35(5):354-9. PubMed ID: 11641571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Effect of tube potential and image receptor on the detection of natural proximal caries in primary teeth.
    Sogur E; Baksı BG; Orhan K; Paksoy SC; Dogan S; Erdal YS; Mert A
    Clin Oral Investig; 2011 Dec; 15(6):901-7. PubMed ID: 20838834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.