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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24309815)

  • 1. Quality of 'commercial-off-the-shelf' (COTS) monitors displaying dental radiographs.
    McIlgorm DJ; Lawinski C; Ng S; McNulty JP
    Br Dent J; 2013 Dec; 215(11):E22. PubMed ID: 24309815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Could standardizing "commercial off-the-shelf" (COTS) monitors to the DICOM part 14: GSDF improve the presentation of dental images? A visual grading characteristics analysis.
    McIlgorm DJ; Lawinski C; Ng S; McNulty JP
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2013; 42(9):20130121. PubMed ID: 23990526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. DICOM part 14: GSDF-calibrated medical grade monitor vs a DICOM part 14: GSDF-calibrated "commercial off-the-shelf" (COTS) monitor for viewing 8-bit dental images.
    McIlgorm DJ; McNulty JP
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2015; 44(3):20140148. PubMed ID: 25421807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. SoftCopy Display Quality Assurance Program at Texas Children's Hospital.
    Ly CK
    J Digit Imaging; 2002; 15 Suppl 1():33-40. PubMed ID: 12105695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Diagnostic Accuracy of Caries and Periapical Lesions on a Monitor with and without DICOM-GSDF Calibration Under Different Ambient Light Conditions.
    Freire RT; Prata-Júnior AR; Pinho JNA; Takeshita WM
    J Digit Imaging; 2022 Jun; 35(3):654-659. PubMed ID: 35166971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Digital display monitor performance in general dental practice.
    Butt A; Savage NW
    Aust Dent J; 2015 Jun; 60(2):240-6. PubMed ID: 25990614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Assessment of monitor conditions for the display of radiological diagnostic images and ambient lighting.
    Wade C; Brennan PC
    Br J Radiol; 2004 Jun; 77(918):465-71. PubMed ID: 15151966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effect of display type and room illuminance in chest radiographs.
    Liukkonen E; Jartti A; Haapea M; Oikarinen H; Ahvenjärvi L; Mattila S; Nevala T; Palosaari K; Perhomaa M; Nieminen MT
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Sep; 26(9):3171-9. PubMed ID: 26662032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems: executive summary of AAPM TG18 report.
    Samei E; Badano A; Chakraborty D; Compton K; Cornelius C; Corrigan K; Flynn MJ; Hemminger B; Hangiandreou N; Johnson J; Moxley-Stevens DM; Pavlicek W; Roehrig H; Rutz L; Shepard J; Uzenoff RA; Wang J; Willis CE;
    Med Phys; 2005 Apr; 32(4):1205-25. PubMed ID: 15895604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Psychophysical evaluation of calibration curve for diagnostic LCD monitor.
    Uemura M; Asai Y; Yamaguchi M; Fujita H; Shintani Y; Sanada S
    Radiat Med; 2006 Dec; 24(10):653-8. PubMed ID: 17186319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Practical assessment of the display performance of radiology workstations.
    Thompson DP; Koller CJ; Eatough JP
    Br J Radiol; 2007 Apr; 80(952):256-60. PubMed ID: 17038407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of grey-scale standard display function as a calibration tool for diagnostic liquid crystal display monitors using psychophysical analysis.
    Asai Y; Shintani Y; Yamaguchi M; Uemura M; Matsumoto M; Kanamori H
    Med Biol Eng Comput; 2005 May; 43(3):319-24. PubMed ID: 16035218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of monitors on approximal caries detection in digital radiographs--standard versus precalibrated DICOM part 14 displays: an in vitro study.
    Hellén-Halme K; Nilsson M; Petersson A
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 May; 107(5):716-20. PubMed ID: 19201219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Performance evaluation of soft copy display systems according to AAPM TG18 protocol.
    Olgar T; Kamberli E
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2013 Jun; 36(2):231-41. PubMed ID: 23729181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Toward clinically relevant standardization of image quality.
    Samei E; Rowberg A; Avraham E; Cornelius C
    J Digit Imaging; 2004 Dec; 17(4):271-8. PubMed ID: 15551103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The assessment and characterization of the built-in internal photometer of primary diagnostic monitors.
    Ruuge AE; Mahmood UA; Erdi YE
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2017 Mar; 18(2):170-175. PubMed ID: 28300388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Object detectability at increased ambient lighting conditions.
    Pollard BJ; Chawla AS; Delong DM; Hashimoto N; Samei E
    Med Phys; 2008 Jun; 35(6):2204-13. PubMed ID: 18649449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Development and evaluation of a method of calibrating medical displays based on fixed adaptation.
    Sund P; Månsson LG; Båth M
    Med Phys; 2015 Apr; 42(4):2018-28. PubMed ID: 25832092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of display monitor devices on intra-oral radiographic caries diagnosis.
    Araki K; Fujikura M; Sano T
    Clin Oral Investig; 2015 Nov; 19(8):1875-9. PubMed ID: 25595866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of room illuminance on monitor black level luminance and monitor calibration.
    Chakrabarti K; Kaczmarek RV; Thomas JA; Romanyukha A
    J Digit Imaging; 2003 Dec; 16(4):350-5. PubMed ID: 14747935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.