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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3475649)

  • 1. Diagnostic imaging assessment of experimental intraoral "folded film".
    Ludlow JB
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1987 Jul; 64(1):123-9. PubMed ID: 3475649
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Use of a "sandwich" technique to control image geometry in clinical studies comparing intraoral xeroradiographs and E-speed films.
    Ludlow JB; Hill RA; Hayes CJ
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1988 May; 65(5):618-25. PubMed ID: 3163790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparative evaluation of the sensitometric properties of screen-film systems and conventional dental receptors for intraoral radiography.
    Kircos LT; Staninec M; Chou L
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Dec; 68(6):787-92. PubMed ID: 2594331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Panoramic radiography in dental diagnostics.
    Molander B
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1996; 119():1-26. PubMed ID: 8971997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of the new RadioVisioGraphy system image quality.
    Benz C; Mouyen F
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Nov; 72(5):627-31. PubMed ID: 1745524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A subjective study of dental diagnostic utility comparing xeroradiography and film radiography.
    Gratt BM; White SC; Sickles EA
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Nov; 68(5):653-60. PubMed ID: 2812719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Intra-oral computed radiography--an in vitro evaluation.
    Lim KF; Loh EE; Hong YH
    J Dent; 1996 Sep; 24(5):359-64. PubMed ID: 8916652
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. In vitro comparison of D- and E-speed film radiography, RVG, and visualix digital radiography for the detection of enamel approximal and dentinal occlusal caries lesions.
    Hintze H; Wenzel A; Jones C
    Caries Res; 1994; 28(5):363-7. PubMed ID: 8001059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Imaging: new versus traditional technological aids.
    Sanderink GC
    Int Dent J; 1993 Aug; 43(4):335-42. PubMed ID: 8276517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Perceived quality of radiographic images after rapid processing of D- and F-speed direct-exposure intraoral x-ray films.
    Bernstein DI; Clark SJ; Scheetz JP; Farman AG; Rosenson B
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2003 Oct; 96(4):486-91. PubMed ID: 14561976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of image quality in dental radiography, part 2: optimum exposure conditions for detection of small mass changes in 6 intraoral radiography systems.
    Yoshiura K; Kawazu T; Chikui T; Tatsumi M; Tokumori K; Tanaka T; Kanda S
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1999 Jan; 87(1):123-9. PubMed ID: 9927091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. E-speed dental films processed with rapid chemistry: a comparison with D-speed film.
    Kaffe I; Gratt BM
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1987 Sep; 64(3):367-72. PubMed ID: 3477753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A laboratory comparison of three imaging systems for image quality and radiation exposure characteristics.
    Bhaskaran V; Qualtrough AJ; Rushton VE; Worthington HV; Horner K
    Int Endod J; 2005 Sep; 38(9):645-52. PubMed ID: 16104978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. An evaluation of the Sens-A-Ray digital dental imaging system.
    McDonnell D; Price C
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1993 Aug; 22(3):121-6. PubMed ID: 8299829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A clinical comparison of speed group D and E dental x-ray films.
    Horton PS; Sippy FH; Kohout FJ; Nelson JF; Kienzle GC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1984 Jul; 58(1):104-8. PubMed ID: 6589567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of two imaging modalities: F-speed film and digital images for detection of osseous defects in patients with interdental vertical bone defects.
    Jorgenson T; Masood F; Beckerley JM; Burgin C; Parker DE
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Dec; 36(8):500-5. PubMed ID: 18033948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An investigation of potential applications of intensifying screens in intraoral radiography.
    Stephens RG; Kogon SL; Reid JA
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1982 Nov; 54(5):591-6. PubMed ID: 6960313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Radiovisiographic diagnosis of dental caries: initial comparison of basic mode videoprints with bitewing radiography.
    Russell M; Pitts NB
    Caries Res; 1993; 27(1):65-70. PubMed ID: 8448777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison between intraoral indirect and conventional film-based imaging for the detection of dental root fractures: an ex vivo study.
    Shintaku WH; Venturin JS; Noujeim M; Dove SB
    Dent Traumatol; 2013 Dec; 29(6):445-9. PubMed ID: 23566073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. High-yield radiography of the maxillofacial complex using the free focus and conventional imaging concepts. The resolution performance of nonscreen and screen-film combinations.
    Jensen TW; Goldberg AJ; Randall GJ
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1983 Sep; 56(3):324-31. PubMed ID: 6579466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.