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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32364600)

  • 41. Local diagnostic reference levels for typical radiographic procedures.
    Tonkopi E; Daniels C; Gale MJ; Schofield SC; Sorhaindo VA; Vanlarkin JL
    Can Assoc Radiol J; 2012 Nov; 63(4):237-41. PubMed ID: 22136965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Radiographer knowledge and practice of paediatric radiation dose protocols in digital radiography in Gauteng.
    Moolman N; Mulla F; Mdletshe S
    Radiography (Lond); 2020 May; 26(2):117-121. PubMed ID: 32052787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Technical note: Four-year experience with utilization of DICOM metadata analytics in clinical digital radiography practice.
    Long Z; Walz-Flannigan AI; Littrell LA; Schueler BA
    Med Phys; 2023 Feb; 50(2):831-836. PubMed ID: 36542418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Effect of beam quality and readout direction in the edge profile on the modulation transfer function of photostimulable phosphor systems via the edge method.
    Takarabe S; Kuramoto T; Shibayama Y; Tsuru H; Tatsumi M; Kato T; Okamura K; Yoshiura K
    J Med Imaging (Bellingham); 2021 Jul; 8(4):043501. PubMed ID: 34307736
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Advances in computed radiography systems and their physical imaging characteristics.
    Cowen AR; Davies AG; Kengyelics SM
    Clin Radiol; 2007 Dec; 62(12):1132-41. PubMed ID: 17981160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Correlation of image quality with exposure index and processing protocol in a computed radiography system.
    Tsalafoutas IA; Blastaris GA; Moutsatsos AS; Chios PS; Efstathopoulos EP
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 130(2):162-71. PubMed ID: 18245792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Development of dosimetry using detectors of diagnostic digital radiography systems.
    Ariga E; Ito S; Deji S; Saze T; Nishizawa K
    Med Phys; 2007 Jan; 34(1):166-74. PubMed ID: 17278501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Direct detector radiography versus dual reading computed radiography: feasibility of dose reduction in chest radiography.
    Gruber M; Uffmann M; Weber M; Prokop M; Balassy C; Schaefer-Prokop C
    Eur Radiol; 2006 Jul; 16(7):1544-50. PubMed ID: 16404566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Digital radiography: are the manufacturers' settings too high? Optimisation of the Kodak digital radiography system with aid of the computed radiography dose index.
    Peters SE; Brennan PC
    Eur Radiol; 2002 Sep; 12(9):2381-7. PubMed ID: 12195499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Strategies for dose reduction in ordinary radiographic examinations using CR and DR.
    Willis CE
    Pediatr Radiol; 2004 Oct; 34 Suppl 3():S196-200; discussion S234-41. PubMed ID: 15558261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Digital radiography versus conventional radiography for the detection of a skull fracture under varying exposure parameters.
    Langen HJ; Klein HM; Wein B; Schiwy-Bochat KH; Stargardt A; Günther RW
    Invest Radiol; 1993 Mar; 28(3):231-4. PubMed ID: 8486490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Comparison of radiation doses to patients undergoing standard radiographic examinations with conventional screen-film radiography, computed radiography and direct digital radiography.
    Compagnone G; Baleni MC; Pagan L; Calzolaio FL; Barozzi L; Bergamini C
    Br J Radiol; 2006 Nov; 79(947):899-904. PubMed ID: 17065288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. 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]  

  • 54. The HVL in soft tissue and the AAPM and IEC exposure indices.
    Poletti J
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2011 Dec; 34(4):535-43. PubMed ID: 21968613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. [Series: Practical Evaluation of Clinical Image Quality (4): Determination of Image Quality in Digital Radiography System].
    Katayama R
    Igaku Butsuri; 2016; 36(3):166-172. PubMed ID: 28442655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Digital radiography of the chest: detector techniques and performance parameters.
    Schaefer-Prokop C; Uffmann M; Eisenhuber E; Prokop M
    J Thorac Imaging; 2003 Jul; 18(3):124-37. PubMed ID: 12867810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Optimizing digital radiography of children.
    Willis CE
    Eur J Radiol; 2009 Nov; 72(2):266-73. PubMed ID: 19345030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. 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]  

  • 59. Image quality and dose management in digital radiography: a new paradigm for optimisation.
    Busch HP; Faulkner K
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):143-7. PubMed ID: 16461521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Optimisation of dose per image in digital imaging.
    Marshall NW
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2001; 94(1-2):83-7. PubMed ID: 11487849
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.