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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36621702)

  • 1. An Overview of Factors Affecting Exposure Level in Digital Detector Systems and their Relevance in Constructing Exposure Tables in Equine Digital Radiography.
    Ludewig E; Rowan C; Schieder K; Frank B
    J Equine Vet Sci; 2023 Feb; 121():104206. PubMed ID: 36621702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. DQE of wireless digital detectors: comparative performance with differing filtration schemes.
    Samei E; Murphy S; Christianson O
    Med Phys; 2013 Aug; 40(8):081910. PubMed ID: 23927324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Technical characterization of five x-ray detectors for paediatric radiography applications.
    Marshall NW; Smet M; Hofmans M; Pauwels H; De Clercq T; Bosmans H
    Phys Med Biol; 2017 Nov; 62(24):N573-N586. PubMed ID: 29064378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Imaging characteristics evaluation of a digital radiography system.
    Moro L; Pannella A; Bassetti C; Fantinato D; Baldi M; Bertoli G
    Radiol Med; 2003; 106(1-2):94-102. PubMed ID: 12951556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Dose-image optimisation in digital radiology with a direct digital detector: an example applied to pelvic examinations.
    Persliden J; Beckman KW; Geijer H; Andersson T
    Eur Radiol; 2002 Jun; 12(6):1584-8. PubMed ID: 12042972
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Digital radiography with a large-area, amorphous-silicon, flat-panel X-ray detector system.
    Spahn M; Strotzer M; Völk M; Böhm S; Geiger B; Hahm G; Feuerbach S
    Invest Radiol; 2000 Apr; 35(4):260-6. PubMed ID: 10764095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Digital radiography of the skeleton using a large-area detector based on amorphous silicon technology: image quality and potential for dose reduction in comparison with screen-film radiography.
    Völk M; Strotzer M; Holzknecht N; Manke C; Lenhart M; Gmeinwieser J; Link J; Reiser M; Feuerbach S
    Clin Radiol; 2000 Aug; 55(8):615-21. PubMed ID: 10964733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Dose efficiency and low-contrast detectability of an amorphous silicon x-ray detector for digital radiography.
    Aufrichtig R; Xue P
    Phys Med Biol; 2000 Sep; 45(9):2653-69. PubMed ID: 11008963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Imaging properties of digital magnification radiography.
    Boyce SJ; Samei E
    Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):984-96. PubMed ID: 16696475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparative analysis of OTF, NPS, and DQE in energy integrating and photon counting digital x-ray detectors.
    Acciavatti RJ; Maidment AD
    Med Phys; 2010 Dec; 37(12):6480-95. PubMed ID: 21302803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Advances in digital radiography: physical principles and system overview.
    Körner M; Weber CH; Wirth S; Pfeifer KJ; Reiser MF; Treitl M
    Radiographics; 2007; 27(3):675-86. PubMed ID: 17495286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of digital radiography systems in terms of effective detective quantum efficiency.
    Bertolini M; Nitrosi A; Rivetti S; Lanconelli N; Pattacini P; Ginocchi V; Iori M
    Med Phys; 2012 May; 39(5):2617-27. PubMed ID: 22559632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Radiation dose and image quality in diagnostic radiology. Optimization of the dose-image quality relationship with clinical experience from scoliosis radiography, coronary intervention and a flat-panel digital detector.
    Geijer H
    Acta Radiol Suppl; 2002 Mar; 43(427):1-43. PubMed ID: 12108231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of the imaging properties of two generations of a CCD-based system for digital chest radiography.
    Båth M; Sund P; Månsson LG
    Med Phys; 2002 Oct; 29(10):2286-97. PubMed ID: 12408303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. OPTIMIZING IMAGE QUALITY, RADIATION DOSAGE TO THE PATIENT AND TO THE DETECTOR IN PEDIATRIC CHEST RADIOGRAPHY: A PHANTOM STUDY OF A PORTABLE DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY SYSTEM.
    Shahgeldi K; Sjöberg T; Nordström J; Lesanu R; Svahn TM
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2019 Dec; 185(4):414-420. PubMed ID: 30916753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Early experience in the use of quantitative image quality measurements for the quality assurance of full field digital mammography x-ray systems.
    Marshall NW
    Phys Med Biol; 2007 Sep; 52(18):5545-68. PubMed ID: 17804881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An experimental comparison of detector performance for direct and indirect digital radiography systems.
    Samei E; Flynn MJ
    Med Phys; 2003 Apr; 30(4):608-22. PubMed ID: 12722813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.