122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2702380)
1. A comparison of two different T-grain films in rare-earth screens with a standard film-screen combination for intravenous pyelography and bone examinations.
Logan H; Daly L; Masterson J
Br J Radiol; 1989 Mar; 62(735):237-40. PubMed ID: 2702380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Sensitometric properties of Agfa Dentus OrthoLux, Agfa Dentus ST8G, and Kodak Ektavision panoramic radiographic film.
Wakoh M; Nishikawa K; Kobayashi N; Farman AG; Kuroyanagi K
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Feb; 91(2):244-51. PubMed ID: 11174605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Film-screen systems: sensitometric comparison of Kodak Ektavision system to Kodak T-Mat/RA system.
Thunthy KH; Weinberg R
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1997 Feb; 83(2):288-92. PubMed ID: 9117763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of the imaging characteristics of the new Kodak Hyper Speed G film with the current T-MAT G/RA film and the CR 9000 system.
Monnin P; Gutierrez D; Bulling S; Lepori D; Verdun FR
Phys Med Biol; 2005 Oct; 50(19):4541-52. PubMed ID: 16177488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Sensitometric effects of varying the intensifying screens used with Agfa Dentus ST8G and RP6 panoramic radiographic films.
Wakoh M; Farman AG; Scarfe WC; Kitagawa H; Kuroyanagi K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 Jul; 26(4):225-9. PubMed ID: 9442613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Information yield: a comparison of Kodak T-Mat G, Ortho L and RP X-Omat films.
Miles DA; Van Dis ML; Peterson MG
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1989 Feb; 18(1):15-8. PubMed ID: 2599233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An evaluation of four rare-earth film-screen combinations.
Nettle JR; Ritchings RT
Br J Radiol; 1980 Oct; 53(634):965-8. PubMed ID: 7426919
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Exposure factors and screen-film combinations in temporomandibular joint radiography.
Thorburn DN; Stockdill DA; Kenyon RP; Cowan I; Ferguson MM
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1991 May; 20(2):87-92. PubMed ID: 1936423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography.
Dimakopoulou AD; Tsalafoutas IA; Georgiou EK; Yakoumakis EN
Br J Radiol; 2006 Feb; 79(938):123-9. PubMed ID: 16489193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [A comparative study of the imaging quality and picture dosage of a new conventional film-screen system for skeletal x-ray diagnosis].
Freitag P; Gückel C; Fournier PJ; Roth J; Steinbrich W
Rofo; 1995 Oct; 163(4):297-302. PubMed ID: 7579215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Kodak T-Mat G film in rotational panoramic radiography.
Ponce AZ; McDavid WD; Lundeen RC; Morris CR
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1986 Jun; 61(6):649-52. PubMed ID: 3459998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A sensitometric comparison of Fuji Super HR-G and Kodak T-mat G panoramic films.
Benson BW; Frederiksen NL
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 May; 79(5):646-8. PubMed ID: 7600231
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A comparison of an Agfa and Kodak film-screen combination for mammography.
Dudson J
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1994 Dec; 17(4):211-6. PubMed ID: 7872903
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A clinical comparison of different film systems for radiotherapy portal imaging.
Foulkes KM; Ostwald PM; Kron T
Med Dosim; 2001; 26(3):281-4. PubMed ID: 11704465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparative study of films and screens for mammography.
Kirkpatrick AE; Law J
Br J Radiol; 1987 Jan; 60(709):73-8. PubMed ID: 3814998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Clinical comparison of high-speed rare-earth screen and par-speed screen for diagnostic efficacy and radiation dosage.
Robinson T; Becker JA; Olson AP
Radiology; 1982 Oct; 145(1):214-6. PubMed ID: 6821592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Thoracic radiography in intensive care units. Comparison of an asymmetric film-screen-grid combination with an L-film].
Luska G; von Boetticher H; Amling B; Herzog R
Rofo; 1995 Aug; 163(2):104-10. PubMed ID: 7670010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Film-based chest radiography: AMBER vs asymmetric screen-film systems.
Chotas HG; Floyd CE; Ravin CE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Oct; 161(4):743-7. PubMed ID: 8372749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of developer temperature changes on the sensitometric properties of direct exposure and screen-film imaging systems.
Kircos LT; Staninec M; Chou LS
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1989 Feb; 18(1):11-4. PubMed ID: 2599232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Short communication: a comparison of fine and medium screens for mammography.
Burch A; Law J
Br J Radiol; 1996 Feb; 69(818):182-5. PubMed ID: 8785649
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
