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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2236846)

  • 41. Digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography at different exposure doses versus mammography film: possibility of radiation dose reduction in detecting rheumatologic bone defects.
    Zähringer M; Reineck S; Perniok A; Krüger K; Andermahr J; Rubbert A; Winnekendonk G
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Mar; 49(2):157-66. PubMed ID: 18300139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Diagnostic quality versus patient exposure with five panoramic screen-film combinations.
    D'Ambrosio JA; Schiff TG; McDavid WD; Langland OE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1986 Apr; 61(4):409-11. PubMed ID: 3458153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. A rare earth screen-film system for dental panoramic radiography.
    Keur JJ
    Aust Dent J; 1983 Apr; 28(2):105-8. PubMed ID: 6577821
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Digital versus screen-film mammography: a retrospective comparison in a population-based screening program.
    Heddson B; Rönnow K; Olsson M; Miller D
    Eur J Radiol; 2007 Dec; 64(3):419-25. PubMed ID: 17383841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Further comparisons of films, screens and cassettes for mammography.
    Law J; Kirkpatrick AE
    Br J Radiol; 1990 Feb; 63(746):128-31. PubMed ID: 2310905
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. [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]  

  • 47. Comparative evaluation of the sensitometric properties of screen-film systems and conventional dental receptors for intraoral radiography.
    Kircos LT; Staninec M; Chou L
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Dec; 68(6):787-92. PubMed ID: 2594331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. [Reduction of radiation dosage in mammography by using film intensifying foil systems in Poland].
    Iwaszkiewicz K; Bończyk J
    Pol Tyg Lek; 1991 Apr 22-29; 46(17-18):346-8. PubMed ID: 1669071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Use of digital mammography in needle localization procedures.
    Dershaw DD; Fleischman RC; Liberman L; Deutch B; Abramson AF; Hann L
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Sep; 161(3):559-62. PubMed ID: 8352104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Experimental investigations of image quality in X-ray mammography with conventional screen film system (SFS), digital phosphor storage plate in/without magnification technique (CR) and digital CCD-technique (CCD).
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Aichinger U; Säbel M; Böhner C; Dobritz M; Wenkel E; Bautz W
    Rontgenpraxis; 2001; 54(4):123-6. PubMed ID: 11883115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Signal-to-noise properties of mammographic film-screen systems.
    Nishikawa RM; Yaffe MJ
    Med Phys; 1985; 12(1):32-9. PubMed ID: 3974523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Computed radiography-based mammography with 50-microm pixel size: intra-individual comparison with film-screen mammography for diagnosis of breast cancers.
    Onishi H; Masuda N; Takechi K; Nakayama T; Tatsuta M; Mihara N; Takamura M; Inoue Y; Kuriyama K; Kotsuma Y; Furukawa H; Murakami T; Nakamura H
    Acad Radiol; 2009 Jul; 16(7):836-41. PubMed ID: 19345121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. [The reduction of radiation burden in mammography using film-screen combination systems].
    Waegner U; Geissler S; Rosenkranz G
    Radiol Diagn (Berl); 1990; 31(5):465-70. PubMed ID: 2277840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Evaluation of radiographic image quality parameters obtained with the REX simulator.
    Magalhaes LA; Drexler GG; deAlmeida CE
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Nov; 147(4):614-8. PubMed ID: 21273198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Mammography with synchrotron radiation: phase-detection techniques.
    Arfelli F; Bonvicini V; Bravin A; Cantatore G; Castelli E; Palma LD; Michiel MD; Fabrizioli M; Longo R; Menk RH; Olivo A; Pani S; Pontoni D; Poropat P; Prest M; Rashevsky A; Ratti M; Rigon L; Tromba G; Vacchi A; Vallazza E; Zanconati F
    Radiology; 2000 Apr; 215(1):286-93. PubMed ID: 10751500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. [Visualization of microcalcifications on mammographies obtained by digital full-field mammography in comparison to conventional film-screen mammography].
    Diekmann S; Bick U; von Heyden H; Diekmann F
    Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):775-9. PubMed ID: 12811689
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. [Dosage loads and quality of the image in mammography].
    Kozlov AP; Shishov VA; Telesh LV; Fedorov IuA
    Vestn Rentgenol Radiol; 1986; (3):74-9. PubMed ID: 3750831
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Film-screen combinations in mammography.
    Price JL; Gamble J; Pearce P
    Br J Radiol; 1985 Jan; 58(685):99-100. PubMed ID: 4063647
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Optimal x-ray spectra for screen-film mammography.
    Jennings RJ; Eastgate RJ; Siedband MP; Ergun DL
    Med Phys; 1981; 8(5):629-39. PubMed ID: 7290015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Assessment of radiographic screen-film systems: a comparison between the use of a microdensitometer and a drum film digitiser.
    Verdun FR; Pachoud M; Bergmann D; Buhr E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):208-13. PubMed ID: 15933110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.