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 *

160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23175645)

  • 1. Doses measured using AEC on direct digital radiographic (DDR) X-rays systems: updated results with an RP 162 perspective.
    Bowden L; Faulkner R; Gallagher A; O'Connor U; Walsh C; Dowling A; O'Reilly G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Feb; 153(2):251-4. PubMed ID: 23175645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Doses under automatic exposure control (AEC) for direct digital radiographic (DDR) X-ray systems.
    Bowden L; Faulkner R; Clancy C; Gallagher A; Devine M; Gorman D; O'Reilly G; Dowling A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):210-4. PubMed ID: 21937592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Survey of compliance with European acceptability criteria for HVL and AEC.
    Kepler K; Vladimirov A
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Feb; 153(2):246-50. PubMed ID: 23173214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Implementation of acceptability criteria for dental radiology in Belgium.
    Clarijs T
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Feb; 153(2):260-3. PubMed ID: 23175642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Application of European suspension criteria to dental radiology: an Irish perspective.
    Gallagher A; Bell A; O'Connor U; Dowling A; O'Reilly G
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Feb; 153(2):255-9. PubMed ID: 23185069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Calibrating automatic exposure control devices for digital radiography.
    Doyle P; Martin CJ
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Nov; 51(21):5475-85. PubMed ID: 17047264
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Physical image quality comparison of four types of digital detector for chest radiology.
    Fernandez JM; Ordiales JM; Guibelalde E; Prieto C; Vano E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):140-3. PubMed ID: 18283060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Practical application of suspension criteria scenarios in general radiography, computed radiography,digital radiography and fluoroscopy.
    O'Connor U; Gallagher A; O'Reilly G; Dowling A; Malone JF
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Feb; 153(2):236-40. PubMed ID: 23169811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Patient dosimetry and image quality in digital radiology from online audit of the X-ray system.
    Vano E; Fernandez JM; Ten JI; Gonzalez L; Guibelalde E; Prieto C
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):199-203. PubMed ID: 16461529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Image quality and dose management in digital radiography: a new paradigm for optimisation.
    Busch HP; Faulkner K
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):143-7. PubMed ID: 16461521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Evaluation of AEC Consistency in Digital X-ray Imaging Systems].
    Saito H; Maruyama A; Miyake H; Imai Y; Nakamura H; Koyano Y; Ochiai K; Miyazono T; Ogura I; Negishi T
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2022 Dec; 78(12):1451-1457. PubMed ID: 36198570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of AEC chamber selection on patient dose and image quality.
    Hawking N; Elmore A
    Radiol Technol; 2009; 80(5):411-9. PubMed ID: 19457845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Managing patient dose in digital radiology. A report of the International Commission on Radiological Protection.
    International Commission on Radiological Protection
    Ann ICRP; 2004; 34(1):1-73. PubMed ID: 15302167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Quality assurance of computed and digital radiography systems.
    Walsh C; Gorman D; Byrne P; Larkin A; Dowling A; Malone JF
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):271-5. PubMed ID: 18319281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Optimising automatic exposure control in computed radiography and the impact on patient dose.
    Doyle P; Gentle D; Martin CJ
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):236-9. PubMed ID: 15933114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Quality control of equipment used in digital and interventional radiology.
    Zoetelief J; van Soldt RT; Suliman II; Jansen JT; Bosmans H
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):277-82. PubMed ID: 16461518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Patient doses and image quality in digital chest radiology.
    Salát D; Nikodemová D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):147-9. PubMed ID: 18321878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Investigation of possible methods for equipment self-tests in digital radiology.
    Zoetelief J; Idris HH; Jansen JT
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):269-73. PubMed ID: 16461526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. An examination of automatic exposure control regimes for two digital radiography systems.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2009 Aug; 54(15):4645-70. PubMed ID: 19590115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Chest radiography: a comparison of image quality and effective dose using four digital systems.
    Pascoal A; Lawinski CP; Mackenzie A; Tabakov S; Lewis CA
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):273-7. PubMed ID: 15933121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.