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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2305071)

  • 1. Nondisplaced fractures: spatial resolution requirements for detection with digital skeletal imaging.
    Murphey MD; Bramble JM; Cook LT; Martin NL; Dwyer SJ
    Radiology; 1990 Mar; 174(3 Pt 1):865-70. PubMed ID: 2305071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Digital skeletal radiography: spatial resolution requirements for detection of subperiosteal resorption.
    Murphey MD
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 Mar; 152(3):541-6. PubMed ID: 2783807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Skeletal surveys for child abuse: comparison of interpretation using digitized images and screen-film radiographs.
    Youmans DC; Don S; Hildebolt C; Shackelford GD; Luker GD; McAlister WH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Nov; 171(5):1415-9. PubMed ID: 9798889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Spatial resolution requirements in digital radiography of scaphoid fractures. An ROC analysis.
    Jónsson A; Laurin S; Karner G; Herrlin K; Hochbergs P; Jonsson K; Rudling O; Sandström S; Sloth M; Svahn G; Pettersson H
    Acta Radiol; 1996 Jul; 37(4):555-60. PubMed ID: 8688242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of fracture and pneumonia detection: comparison of laser-digitized workstation images and conventional analog radiographs.
    Ackerman SJ; Gitlin JN; Gayler RW; Flagle CD; Bryan RN
    Radiology; 1993 Jan; 186(1):263-8. PubMed ID: 8416576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Spatial resolution requirements for digital chest radiographs: an ROC study of observer performance in selected cases.
    Lams PM; Cocklin ML
    Radiology; 1986 Jan; 158(1):11-9. PubMed ID: 3940365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy of diagnosis of subtle chest disease and subtle fractures with a teleradiology system.
    Larson A; Lynch DA; Zeligman B; Harlow C; Vanoni C; Thieme G; Kilcoyne R
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Jan; 170(1):19-22. PubMed ID: 9423590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Fracture diagnosis with digital luminescence radiography].
    Klein HM; Wein B; Langen HJ; Glaser KH; Stargardt A; Günther RW
    Rofo; 1991 Jun; 154(6):582-6. PubMed ID: 1648759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Digitized radiographs in skeletal trauma: a performance comparison between a digital workstation and the original film images.
    Wilson AJ; Hodge JC
    Radiology; 1995 Aug; 196(2):565-8. PubMed ID: 7617878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Subtle orthopedic fractures: teleradiology workstation versus film interpretation.
    Scott WW; Rosenbaum JE; Ackerman SJ; Reichle RL; Magid D; Weller JC; Gitlin JN
    Radiology; 1993 Jun; 187(3):811-5. PubMed ID: 8497636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [ROC comparison of visualization of hand fractures using digital and conventional techniques].
    Hofstetter H; Voegeli E
    Rofo; 1997 Sep; 167(3):274-9. PubMed ID: 9376556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Digital luminescence radiography in comparison with the conventional film-screen technique in diagnosis of fractures].
    Fink U; Schwerdtfeger J; Fink BK; Schätzl M; Reiser M
    Rofo; 1996 Apr; 164(4):275-80. PubMed ID: 8645859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Diagnostic accuracy of fracture detection in suspected non-accidental injury: the effect of edge enhancement and digital display on observer performance.
    Offiah AC; Moon L; Hall CM; Todd-Pokropek A
    Clin Radiol; 2006 Feb; 61(2):163-73. PubMed ID: 16439222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Different pixel pitch and maximum luminance of medical grade displays may result in different evaluations of digital radiography images.
    Laffranchi A; Cicero C; Lualdi M; Ciniselli CM; Calareso G; Canestrini S; Greco FG; Alberioli E; Cavatorta C; Guarise A; Pignoli E; Plebani M; Scaramuzza D; Siciliano C; Verderio P; Marchianò A
    Radiol Med; 2018 Aug; 123(8):586-592. PubMed ID: 29671208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [The detectability of osteoarticular lesions of the extremities on the television monitor].
    Salvini E; Zincone G; Macchi I; Mariani AM; Crespi A; Paruccini N
    Radiol Med; 1994 Apr; 87(4):401-4. PubMed ID: 8190921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Digital radiography of subtle pulmonary abnormalities: an ROC study of the effect of pixel size on observer performance.
    MacMahon H; Vyborny CJ; Metz CE; Doi K; Sabeti V; Solomon SL
    Radiology; 1986 Jan; 158(1):21-6. PubMed ID: 3940383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Efficacy of digital radiography for the detection of pneumothorax: comparison with conventional chest radiography.
    Elam EA; Rehm K; Hillman BJ; Maloney K; Fajardo LL; McNeill K
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1992 Mar; 158(3):509-14. PubMed ID: 1738985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of breast masses using digitized images versus screen-film mammography.
    Liang Z; Du X; Liu J; Yao X; Yang Y; Li K
    Acta Radiol; 2008 Jul; 49(6):618-22. PubMed ID: 18568552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparative evaluation of digital radiography versus conventional radiography of fractured skulls.
    Langen HJ; Klein HM; Wein B; Stargardt A; Günther RW
    Invest Radiol; 1993 Aug; 28(8):686-9. PubMed ID: 8376000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Interpretation accuracy of a CCD film digitizer.
    Gitlin JN; Scott WW; Bell K; Narayan A
    J Digit Imaging; 2002; 15 Suppl 1(2):57-63. PubMed ID: 12105698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.