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 *

179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23927324)

  • 1. DQE of wireless digital detectors: comparative performance with differing filtration schemes.
    Samei E; Murphy S; Christianson O
    Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081910. PubMed ID: 23927324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of digital radiography systems in terms of effective detective quantum efficiency.
    Bertolini M; Nitrosi A; Rivetti S; Lanconelli N; Pattacini P; Ginocchi V; Iori M
    Med Phys; 2012 May; 39(5):2617-27. PubMed ID: 22559632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Technical characterization of five x-ray detectors for paediatric radiography applications.
    Marshall NW; Smet M; Hofmans M; Pauwels H; De Clercq T; Bosmans H
    Phys Med Biol; 2017 Nov; 62(24):N573-N586. PubMed ID: 29064378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Physical characterization of a novel wireless DRX Plus 3543C using both a carbon nano tube (CNT) mobile x-ray system and a traditional x-ray system.
    Nitrosi A; Bertolini M; Chendi A; Trojani V; Canovi L; Pattacini P; Iori M
    Phys Med Biol; 2020 Jun; 65(11):11NT02. PubMed ID: 32311679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An experimental comparison of detector performance for direct and indirect digital radiography systems.
    Samei E; Flynn MJ
    Med Phys; 2003 Apr; 30(4):608-22. PubMed ID: 12722813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Early experience in the use of quantitative image quality measurements for the quality assurance of full field digital mammography x-ray systems.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Sep; 52(18):5545-68. PubMed ID: 17804881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Technical Note: Impact on detective quantum efficiency of edge angle determination method by International Electrotechnical Commission methodology for cardiac x-ray image detectors.
    Gislason-Lee AJ; Tunstall CM; Kengyelics SK; Cowen AR; Davies AG
    Med Phys; 2015 Aug; 42(8):4423-7. PubMed ID: 26233172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Quality control measurements for digital x-ray detectors.
    Marshall NW; Mackenzie A; Honey ID
    Phys Med Biol; 2011 Feb; 56(4):979-99. PubMed ID: 21248386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Measurement of the detective quantum efficiency in digital detectors consistent with the IEC 62220-1 standard: practical considerations regarding the choice of filter material.
    Ranger NT; Samei E; Dobbins JT; Ravin CE
    Med Phys; 2005 Jul; 32(7):2305-11. PubMed ID: 16121586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Image quality assessment in digital mammography: part I. Technical characterization of the systems.
    Marshall NW; Monnin P; Bosmans H; Bochud FO; Verdun FR
    Phys Med Biol; 2011 Jul; 56(14):4201-20. PubMed ID: 21701051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. NPWE model observer as a validated alternative for contrast detail analysis of digital detectors in general radiography.
    Van Peteghem N; Bosmans H; Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2016 Nov; 61(21):N575-N591. PubMed ID: 27754987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison between objective and subjective image quality measurements for a full field digital mammography system.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 May; 51(10):2441-63. PubMed ID: 16675862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Image quality in two phosphor-based flat panel digital radiographic detectors.
    Samei E
    Med Phys; 2003 Jul; 30(7):1747-57. PubMed ID: 12906192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Physical evaluation of a needle photostimulable phosphor based CR mammography system.
    Marshall NW; Lemmens K; Bosmans H
    Med Phys; 2012 Feb; 39(2):811-24. PubMed ID: 22320791
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Performance of a 41X41-cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector for radiographic imaging applications.
    Granfors PR; Aufrichtig R
    Med Phys; 2000 Jun; 27(6):1324-31. PubMed ID: 10902562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Intercomparison of methods for image quality characterization. I. Modulation transfer function.
    Samei E; Ranger NT; Dobbins JT; Chen Y
    Med Phys; 2006 May; 33(5):1454-65. PubMed ID: 16752580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Imaging performance of amorphous selenium based flat-panel detectors for digital mammography: characterization of a small area prototype detector.
    Zhao W; Ji WG; Debrie A; Rowlands JA
    Med Phys; 2003 Feb; 30(2):254-63. PubMed ID: 12607843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Performance of a 41 x 41 cm2 amorphous silicon flat panel x-ray detector designed for angiographic and R&F imaging applications.
    Granfors PR; Aufrichtig R; Possin GE; Giambattista BW; Huang ZS; Liu J; Ma B
    Med Phys; 2003 Oct; 30(10):2715-26. PubMed ID: 14596310
    [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. Measurement of the detective quantum efficiency in digital detectors consistent with the IEC 62220-1 standard: Practical considerations regarding the choice of filter material.
    Ranger NT; Samei E; Dobbins JT; Ravin CE
    Med Phys; 2005 Jul; 32(7Part1):2305-2311. PubMed ID: 28493576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.