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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23293957)

  • 21. [Experimental investigations for dose reduction by optimizing the radiation quality for digital mammography with an a-Se detector].
    Schulz-Wendtland R; Hermann KP; Wenkel E; Böhner C; Lell M; Dassel MS; Bautz WA
    Rofo; 2007 May; 179(5):487-91. PubMed ID: 17436182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The effect of added filtration on radiation dose and image quality in digital radiography of newborns.
    Papadakis AE; Giannakaki V; Hatzidaki E; Damilakis J
    Pediatr Radiol; 2023 Sep; 53(10):2060-2068. PubMed ID: 37310445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. An investigation of flat panel equipment variables on image quality with a dedicated cardiac phantom.
    Dragusin O; Bosmans H; Pappas C; Desmet W
    Phys Med Biol; 2008 Sep; 53(18):4927-40. PubMed ID: 18711249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. How good is the ACR accreditation phantom for assessing image quality in digital mammography?
    Huda W; Sajewicz AM; Ogden KM; Scalzetti EM; Dance DR
    Acad Radiol; 2002 Jul; 9(7):764-72. PubMed ID: 12139090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Optimizing Contrast Resolution in Digital Chest Radiography by Varying Copper Filtration and kVp.
    Balac V; Grossman R; Griswold R; Bowman D
    Radiol Technol; 2023 Nov; 95(2):94-104. PubMed ID: 37940170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Dose optimization in cardiac x-ray imaging.
    Gislason-Lee AJ; McMillan C; Cowen AR; Davies AG
    Med Phys; 2013 Sep; 40(9):091911. PubMed ID: 24007162
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Super-resolution variable-dose imaging in digital radiography: quality and dose reduction with a fluoroscopic flat-panel detector.
    Berliner L; Buffa A
    Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg; 2011 Sep; 6(5):663-73. PubMed ID: 21298404
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effect of automatic tube current modulation on radiation dose and image quality for low tube voltage multidetector row CT angiography: phantom study.
    Schindera ST; Nelson RC; Yoshizumi T; Toncheva G; Nguyen G; DeLong DM; Szucs-Farkas Z
    Acad Radiol; 2009 Aug; 16(8):997-1002. PubMed ID: 19409820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Amorphous silicon, flat-panel, x-ray detector versus storage phosphor-based computed radiography: contrast-detail phantom study at different tube voltages and detector entrance doses.
    Hamer OW; Völk M; Zorger Z; Feuerbach S; Strotzer M
    Invest Radiol; 2003 Apr; 38(4):212-20. PubMed ID: 12649645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Optimization of low-contrast detectability in thin-collimated modern multidetector CT using an interactive sliding-thin-slab averaging algorithm.
    von Falck C; Hartung A; Berndzen F; King B; Galanski M; Shin HO
    Invest Radiol; 2008 Apr; 43(4):229-35. PubMed ID: 18340246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. OPTIMIZING IMAGE QUALITY, RADIATION DOSAGE TO THE PATIENT AND TO THE DETECTOR IN PEDIATRIC CHEST RADIOGRAPHY: A PHANTOM STUDY OF A PORTABLE DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY SYSTEM.
    Shahgeldi K; Sjöberg T; Nordström J; Lesanu R; Svahn TM
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2019 Dec; 185(4):414-420. PubMed ID: 30916753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Optimization of the exposure parameters in digital mammography using contrast-detail metrics.
    Rojas LJ; Fausto AMF; Mol AW; Velasco FG; Abreu POS; Henriques G; Furquim TAC
    Phys Med; 2017 Oct; 42():13-18. PubMed ID: 29173906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparing 10 kVp and 15% Rules in Extremity Radiography.
    Coffey H; Chanopensiri V; Ly B; Nguyen D
    Radiol Technol; 2020 Jul; 91(6):516-524. PubMed ID: 32606229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Diagnostic performance of a flat-panel detector at low tube voltage in chest radiography: a phantom study.
    Bernhardt TM; Rapp-Bernhardt U; Lenzen H; Röhl FW; Diederich S; Papke K; Ludwig K; Heindel W
    Invest Radiol; 2004 Feb; 39(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 14734924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Image quality and radiation dose in planar imaging - Image quality figure of merits from the CDRAD phantom.
    Konst B; Weedon-Fekjaer H; Båth M
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2019 Jul; 20(7):151-159. PubMed ID: 31152576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Optimisation of the AP abdomen projection for larger patient body thicknesses.
    Gatt S; Portelli JL; Zarb F
    Radiography (Lond); 2022 Feb; 28(1):107-114. PubMed ID: 34544645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Evaluation of Radiation Dose Reduction and its Effect on Image Quality for Different Flat-Panel Detectors.
    Pearlin RB; Livingstone RS; Jasper A; Keshava SKN; Sridhar G
    J Med Phys; 2022; 47(1):73-78. PubMed ID: 35548029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Impact of acquisition parameters on dose and image quality optimisation in paediatric pelvis radiography-A phantom study.
    Mohammed Ali A; Hogg P; Abuzaid M; England A
    Eur J Radiol; 2019 Sep; 118():130-137. PubMed ID: 31439232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Determining appropriate imaging parameters for kilovoltage intrafraction monitoring: an experimental phantom study.
    Wallace D; Ng JA; Keall PJ; O'Brien RT; Poulsen PR; Juneja P; Booth JT
    Phys Med Biol; 2015 Jun; 60(12):4835-47. PubMed ID: 26057776
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Factors influencing the absorbed dose in intraoral radiography.
    Kaeppler G; Dietz K; Herz K; Reinert S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):506-13. PubMed ID: 18033949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.