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 *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31316908)

  • 1. Image Quality Assessment of the Digital Radiography Units in Tabriz, Iran: A Phantom Study.
    Gharehaghaji N; Khezerloo D; Abbasiazar T
    J Med Signals Sens; 2019; 9(2):137-142. PubMed ID: 31316908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Flat panel digital radiography compared with storage phosphor computed radiography: assessment of dose versus image quality in phantom studies.
    Fischbach F; Ricke J; Freund T; Werk M; Spors B; Baumann C; Pech MJ; Felix R
    Invest Radiol; 2002 Nov; 37(11):609-14. PubMed ID: 12393973
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of image quality among three X-ray systems for chest radiography: first step in optimisation.
    Nocetti D; Ubeda C; Calcagno S; Acevedo J; Pardo D
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2015 Jul; 165(1-4):386-91. PubMed ID: 25821212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Patient's effective dose and performance assessment of computed radiography systems.
    Bushra A; Sulieman A; Edam A; Tamam N; Babikir E; Alrihaima N; Alfaki E; Babikir S; Almujally A; Otayni A; Alkhorayef M; Abdelradi A; Bradley DA
    Appl Radiat Isot; 2023 Mar; 193():110627. PubMed ID: 36584412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of radiographic techniques on the low-contrast detail detectability performance of digital radiography systems.
    Alsleem H; U P; Mong KS; Davidson R
    Radiol Technol; 2014; 85(6):614-22. PubMed ID: 25002641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Radiographers' Ability to Detect Low-Contrast Detail in Digital Radiography Systems.
    Alsleem H; Davidson R
    Radiol Technol; 2015; 87(1):29-37. PubMed ID: 26377266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Digital chest radiography image quality assessment with dose reduction.
    Grewal RK; Young N; Colins L; Karunnaratne N; Sabharwal N
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2012 Mar; 35(1):71-80. PubMed ID: 22302464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Image Quality and Clinical Usefulness of Ray-summation Image Reconstructed from CT Data, Compared with Digital Radiography].
    Suzuki S; Ichikawa K; Tamaki S
    Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi; 2017; 73(5):372-381. PubMed ID: 28529251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Analog and digital systems of imaging in roentgenodiagnostics.
    Oborska-Kumaszyńska D; Wiśniewska-Kubka S
    Pol J Radiol; 2010 Apr; 75(2):73-81. PubMed ID: 22802780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Quality assurance of computed and digital radiography systems.
    Walsh C; Gorman D; Byrne P; Larkin A; Dowling A; Malone JF
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):271-5. PubMed ID: 18319281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A cross-sectional study of the radiation dose and image quality of X-ray equipment used in IVR.
    Inaba Y; Chida K; Kobayashi R; Zuguchi M
    J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2016 Jul; 17(4):391-401. PubMed ID: 27455503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Performance evaluation of an 85-cm-bore X-ray computed tomography scanner designed for radiation oncology and comparison with current diagnostic CT scanners.
    Garcia-Ramirez JL; Mutic S; Dempsey JF; Low DA; Purdy JA
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2002 Mar; 52(4):1123-31. PubMed ID: 11958910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of full field digital (FFD) and computed radiography (CR) mammography systems in Greece.
    Kalathaki M; Hourdakis CJ; Economides S; Tritakis P; Kalyvas N; Simantirakis G; Manousaridis G; Kaisas I; Kamenopoulou V
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Sep; 147(1-2):202-5. PubMed ID: 21821614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. High kilovoltage digital exposure techniques and patient dosimetry.
    Fauber TL; Cohen TF; Dempsey MC
    Radiol Technol; 2011; 82(6):501-10. PubMed ID: 21771934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Introduction of a New Parameter for Evaluation of Digital Radiography System Performance.
    Choopani MR; Chaparian A
    J Med Signals Sens; 2020; 10(3):196-200. PubMed ID: 33062611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Experimental investigation of the dose and image quality characteristics of a digital mammography imaging system.
    Huda W; Sajewicz AM; Ogden KM; Dance DR
    Med Phys; 2003 Mar; 30(3):442-8. PubMed ID: 12674245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. SU-E-J-21: An Intercomparison of Imaging Performance of Two Linac-Mounted Imaging Systems Used in Radiation Therapy: TrueBeam and Trilogy.
    Kim C; Furhang E; Lazos D; Harrison L
    Med Phys; 2012 Jun; 39(6Part6):3656-3657. PubMed ID: 28517576
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Image quality of conventional images of dual-layer SPECTRAL CT: A phantom study.
    van Ommen F; Bennink E; Vlassenbroek A; Dankbaar JW; Schilham AMR; Viergever MA; de Jong HWAM
    Med Phys; 2018 Jul; 45(7):3031-3042. PubMed ID: 29749624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.