173 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32845471)
21. Paediatric absorbed doses from rotational panoramic radiography.
Hayakawa Y; Kobayashi N; Kuroyanagi K; Nishizawa K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 Sep; 30(5):285-92. PubMed ID: 11571549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Dosimetry of two extraoral direct digital imaging devices: NewTom cone beam CT and Orthophos Plus DS panoramic unit.
Ludlow JB; Davies-Ludlow LE; Brooks SL
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Jul; 32(4):229-34. PubMed ID: 13679353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Absorbed doses for patients undergoing panoramic radiography, cephalometric radiography and CBCT.
Wrzesień M; Olszewski J
Int J Occup Med Environ Health; 2017 Jul; 30(5):705-713. PubMed ID: 28584324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Effect of dose reduction in digital dental panoramic radiography on image quality.
Dannewitz B; Hassfeld S; Eickholz P; Mühling J
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2002 Jan; 31(1):50-5. PubMed ID: 11803389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Radiation exposure to critical organs in panoramic dental examination.
Bahreyni Toossi MT; Akbari F; Bayani Roodi S
Acta Med Iran; 2012; 50(12):809-13. PubMed ID: 23456522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Radiation doses of indirect and direct digital cephalometric radiography.
Gijbels F; Sanderink G; Wyatt J; Van Dam J; Nowak B; Jacobs R
Br Dent J; 2004 Aug; 197(3):149-52; discussion 140. PubMed ID: 15311250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Radiation dosimetry analyses of radiographic imaging systems used for orthodontic treatment: comparison among child, adolescent, and adult patients.
Lee KS; Nam OH; Kim GT; Choi SC; Choi YS; Hwang EH
Oral Radiol; 2021 Apr; 37(2):245-250. PubMed ID: 32361820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Can modifying shielding, field of view, and exposure settings make the effective dose of a cone-beam computed tomography comparable to traditional radiographs used for orthodontic diagnosis?
Ting S; Attaia D; Johnson KB; Kossa SS; Friedland B; Allareddy V; Masoud MI
Angle Orthod; 2020 Sep; 90(5):655-664. PubMed ID: 33378479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Dose distributions in adult and child head phantoms for panoramic and cone beam computed tomography imaging of the temporomandibular joint.
Iskanderani D; Nilsson M; Alstergren P; Hellén-Halme K
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2020 Aug; 130(2):200-208. PubMed ID: 32094027
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Diagnostic accuracy of in vitro panoramic radiographs depending on the exposure.
Kaeppler G; Dietz K; Reinert S
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Feb; 36(2):68-74. PubMed ID: 17403882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Optimisation of patient doses in programmable dental panoramic radiography.
Lecomber AR; Downes SL; Mokhtari M; Faulkner K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2000 Mar; 29(2):107-12. PubMed ID: 10808225
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Comparing 10 kVp and 15% Rules in Extremity Radiography.
Coffey H; Chanopensiri V; Ly B; Nguyen D
Radiol Technol; 2020 Jul; 91(6):516-524. PubMed ID: 32606229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Factors influencing the absorbed dose in intraoral radiography.
Kaeppler G; Dietz K; Herz K; Reinert S
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):506-13. PubMed ID: 18033949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Estimation of radiation exposure in low-dose multislice computed tomography of the heart and comparison with a calculation program.
Hohl C; Mühlenbruch G; Wildberger JE; Leidecker C; Süss C; Schmidt T; Günther RW; Mahnken AH
Eur Radiol; 2006 Aug; 16(8):1841-6. PubMed ID: 16456650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Optimization of exposure in panoramic radiography while maintaining image quality using adaptive filtering.
Svenson B; Larsson L; Båth M
Acta Odontol Scand; 2016; 74(3):229-35. PubMed ID: 26478956
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Radiation doses in examination of lower third molars with computed tomography and conventional radiography.
Ohman A; Kull L; Andersson J; Flygare L
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2008 Dec; 37(8):445-52. PubMed ID: 19033429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparison of patient dose from imaging protocols for dental implant planning using conventional radiography and computed tomography.
Lecomber AR; Yoneyama Y; Lovelock DJ; Hosoi T; Adams AM
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2001 Sep; 30(5):255-9. PubMed ID: 11571544
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Fundamental research for dose control during supine dental panoramic radiography.
Nitanda A; Iwawaki A; Otaka Y; Tamatsu Y; Ishii T; Ochiai A; Otomo Y; Kito S; Saka H
J Oral Biosci; 2023 Dec; 65(4):365-370. PubMed ID: 37717634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparison of radiation levels from computed tomography and conventional dental radiographs.
Ngan DC; Kharbanda OP; Geenty JP; Darendeliler MA
Aust Orthod J; 2003 Nov; 19(2):67-75. PubMed ID: 14703331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Radiation dose of cone-beam computed tomography compared to conventional radiographs in orthodontics.
Signorelli L; Patcas R; Peltomäki T; Schätzle M
J Orofac Orthop; 2016 Jan; 77(1):9-15. PubMed ID: 26747662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
