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: 32610723)

  • 1. Comparison of two digital intraoral radiography imaging systems as a function of contrast resolution and exposure time.
    Aydin KC; Demirel O; Özcan M
    Minerva Stomatol; 2020 Jun; 69(3):148-152. PubMed ID: 32610723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Variable-resolution cone-beam computerized tomography with enhancement filtration compared with intraoral photostimulable phosphor radiography in detection of transverse root fractures in an in vitro model.
    Wenzel A; Haiter-Neto F; Frydenberg M; Kirkevang LL
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2009 Dec; 108(6):939-45. PubMed ID: 19875312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Numerical Evaluation of Image Contrast for Thicker and Thinner Objects among Current Intraoral Digital Imaging Systems.
    Dashpuntsag O; Yoshida M; Kasai R; Maeda N; Hosoki H; Honda E
    Biomed Res Int; 2017; 2017():5215413. PubMed ID: 28497053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Students' attitudes to digital radiography and measurement accuracy of two digital systems in connection with root canal treatment.
    Wenzel A; Kirkevang LL
    Eur J Dent Educ; 2004 Nov; 8(4):167-71. PubMed ID: 15469443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparative study of a wireless digital system and 2 PSP digital systems on proximal caries detection and pixel values.
    dos Anjos Pontual A; de Melo DP; Pontual ML; de Almeida SM; Haiter-Neto F
    Gen Dent; 2013; 61(6):56-60. PubMed ID: 24064165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of Efficiency and Image Quality of Photostimulable Phosphor Plate and Charge-Coupled Device Receptors in Dental Radiography.
    Zhang W; Huynh C; Jadhav A; Pinales J; Arvizu L; Tsai J; Flores N
    J Dent Educ; 2019 Oct; 83(10):1205-1212. PubMed ID: 31235501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. High resolution charge-coupled device sensor vs. medium resolution photostimulable phosphor plate digital receptors for detection of root fractures in vitro.
    Wenzel A; Kirkevang LL
    Dent Traumatol; 2005 Feb; 21(1):32-6. PubMed ID: 15660754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Analysis of image defects in digital intraoral radiography based on photostimulable phosphor plates.
    Tashiro M; Nakatani A; Sugiura K; Nakayama E
    Oral Radiol; 2023 Apr; 39(2):355-363. PubMed ID: 35948784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Could the radiographic image quality be affected by the excessive use of the photostimulable phosphor plate?
    Ruiz DC; Gomes AF; Fontenele RC; Haiter Neto F; Freitas DQ; Groppo FC
    Braz Dent J; 2023; 34(1):39-44. PubMed ID: 36888843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Subjective image quality of solid-state and photostimulable phosphor systems for digital intra-oral radiography.
    Borg E; Attaelmanan A; Gröndahl HG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Mar; 29(2):70-5. PubMed ID: 10808218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of the Radiopacities of Bulk-fill Restoratives Using Two Digital Radiography Systems.
    Yasa E; Yasa B; Aglarci OS; Ertas ET
    Oper Dent; 2015; 40(5):E197-205. PubMed ID: 26237642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Intraoral versus extraoral bitewing radiography in detection of enamel proximal caries: an ex vivo study.
    Abu El-Ela WH; Farid MM; Mostafa MS
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2016; 45(4):20150326. PubMed ID: 26892946
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Do image enhancement filters in complementary metal oxide semiconductor and photostimulable phosphor imaging systems improve the detection of fractured endodontic instruments in periapical radiography?
    Costa ED; Brasil DM; Gaêta-Araujo H; Oliveira-Santos C; Freitas DQ
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2021 Feb; 131(2):247-255. PubMed ID: 32811790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Benefits of using a photostimulable phosphor plate protective device.
    de Moura G; Vizzotto MB; Tiecher PFDS; Arús NA; Silveira HLDD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2021 Sep; 50(6):20200339. PubMed ID: 33411592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Analysis of the deterioration of photostimulable phosphor plates.
    Souza-Pinto GN; Santaella GM; Coli AA; Oenning AC; Haiter-Neto F
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2020 Sep; 49(6):20190500. PubMed ID: 32302219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of differences in pixel size on image characteristics of digital intraoral radiographic systems: a physical and visual evaluation.
    Kuramoto T; Takarabe S; Okamura K; Shiotsuki K; Shibayama Y; Tsuru H; Akamine H; Tatsumi M; Kato T; Morishita J; Yoshiura K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2020 Sep; 49(6):20190378. PubMed ID: 32302229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The role of software in quality assurance for indirect digital intraoral imaging.
    Buchanan A; Hancock R; Kalathingal S
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2020 Sep; 130(3):313-321. PubMed ID: 32430258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical comparison of intraoral CMOS and PSP detectors in terms of time efficiency, patient comfort, and subjective image quality.
    Kamburoğlu K; Samunahmetoğlu E; Eratam N; Sönmez G; Karahan S
    Imaging Sci Dent; 2022 Mar; 52(1):93-101. PubMed ID: 35387105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of technique errors of intraoral radiographs taken on film v photostimulable phosphor (PSP) plates.
    Zhang W; Huynh CP; Abramovitch K; Leon IL; Arvizu L
    Tex Dent J; 2012 Jun; 129(6):589-96. PubMed ID: 22866414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Forensic oral imaging quality of hand-held dental X-ray devices: comparison of two image receptors and two devices.
    Pittayapat P; Thevissen P; Fieuws S; Jacobs R; Willems G
    Forensic Sci Int; 2010 Jan; 194(1-3):20-7. PubMed ID: 19913377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.