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 *

118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25213263)

  • 41. Monte carlo study of MOSFET packaging, optimised for improved energy response: single MOSFET filtration.
    Othman MA; Cutajar DL; Hardcastle N; Guatelli S; Rosenfeld AB
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2010 Sep; 141(1):10-7. PubMed ID: 20460400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Radiation dose in diagnostic radiology: Monte Carlo simulation studies.
    Chan HP; Doi K
    Med Phys; 1984; 11(4):480-90. PubMed ID: 6482844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Response of alanine and radio-photo-luminescence dosemeters to mixed high-energy radiation fields.
    Vincke H; Brunner I; Floret I; Forkel-Wirth D; Fuerstner M; Mayer S; Theis C
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2007; 125(1-4):340-4. PubMed ID: 17369266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Evaluation of two objective methods to optimize kVp and personnel exposure using a digital indirect flat panel detector and simulated veterinary patients.
    Copple C; Robertson ID; Thrall DE; Samei E
    Vet Radiol Ultrasound; 2013; 54(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 23293957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Occupational radiation doses in interventional radiology: simulations.
    Siiskonen T; Tapiovaara M; Kosunen A; Lehtinen M; Vartiainen E
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):36-8. PubMed ID: 18283062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Characterization of optically stimulated luminescence dosemeters to measure organ doses in diagnostic radiology.
    Endo A; Katoh T; Kobayashi I; Joshi R; Sur J; Okano T
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2012 Mar; 41(3):211-6. PubMed ID: 22116136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Effective dose equivalents, HE, in diagnostic radiology.
    Huda W; Bissessur K
    Med Phys; 1990; 17(6):998-1003. PubMed ID: 2280743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Estimating effective dose for a cardiac catheterisation procedure with single or double personal dosemeters.
    Schultz FW; Zoetelief J
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2006; 118(2):196-204. PubMed ID: 16517567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. CORRELATION BETWEEN ROUTINE PERSONAL DOSIMETRY READING AND THE DOSE TO THE BRAIN OF INTERVENTIONAL STAFF.
    Smeulders J; da Silva EH; Struelens L; Vanhavere F; De Mey J; Martin CJ; Buls N
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2022 May; 198(6):349-357. PubMed ID: 35482286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. 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]  

  • 51. Hp(0.07) photon dosemeters for eye lens dosimetry: calibration on a rod vs. a slab phantom.
    Behrens R; Engelhardt J; Figel M; Hupe O; Jordan M; Seifert R
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2012 Jan; 148(2):139-42. PubMed ID: 21393309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Personal dose equivalent angular response factors for photons with energies up to 1 GeV.
    Veinot KG
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Apr; 154(2):250-61. PubMed ID: 22914333
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Exposures in interventional radiology using Monte Carlo simulation coupled with virtual anthropomorphic phantoms.
    Santos WS; Neves LP; Perini AP; Belinato W; Caldas LVE; Carvalho AB; Maia AF
    Phys Med; 2015 Dec; 31(8):929-933. PubMed ID: 26160701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Response of Harshaw neutron thermoluminescence dosemeters in terms of the revised ICRP/ICRU recommendations.
    Veinot KG; Hertel NE
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 113(4):442-8. PubMed ID: 15788417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Preliminary study of using imaging plates to map skin dose of patients in interventional radiology procedures.
    Ohuchi H; Satoh T; Eguchi Y; Mori K
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(4):432-9. PubMed ID: 15985500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. [Radiation exposure of children in pediatric radiology. Part 4: Entrance doses achieved during the X-ray examination of the chest].
    Seidenbusch MC; Schneider K
    Rofo; 2008 Dec; 180(12):1082-103. PubMed ID: 19009497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. AAA and PBC calculation accuracy in the surface build-up region in tangential beam treatments. Phantom and breast case study with the Monte Carlo code PENELOPE.
    Panettieri V; Barsoum P; Westermark M; Brualla L; Lax I
    Radiother Oncol; 2009 Oct; 93(1):94-101. PubMed ID: 19541380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Radiation dose in digital chest radiography: comparison among three technologies.
    Saiani F; Ghirardi C; Rodella CA; Feroldi P; Chiesa A
    Radiol Med; 2004 Apr; 107(4):401-7. PubMed ID: 15103291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Evaluation of patient effective dose of neurovascular imaging protocols for C-arm cone-beam CT.
    Wang C; Nguyen G; Toncheva G; Jiang X; Ferrell A; Smith T; Yoshizumi T
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2014 May; 202(5):1072-7. PubMed ID: 24758663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Female gonadal exposure dose in routine diagnostic radiology.
    Rosekrans P; Penn W; Hasman A
    Radiol Clin (Basel); 1976; 45(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 935381
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.