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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37909638)

  • 41. Free DICOM image viewing and processing software for your desktop computer: what's available and what it can do for you.
    Escott EJ; Rubinstein D
    Radiographics; 2003; 23(5):1341-57. PubMed ID: 12975521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. A five-step approach to digital image manipulation for the radiologist.
    Corl FM; Garland MR; Lawler LP; Fishman EK
    Radiographics; 2002; 22(4):981-92. PubMed ID: 12110727
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. DICOM Format and Protocol Standardization-A Core Requirement for Digital Pathology Success.
    Clunie DA
    Toxicol Pathol; 2021 Jun; 49(4):738-749. PubMed ID: 33063645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Informatics in radiology (infoRAD): free DICOM image viewing and processing software for the Macintosh computer: what's available and what it can do for you.
    Escott EJ; Rubinstein D
    Radiographics; 2004; 24(6):1763-77. PubMed ID: 15537984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Dr. Browse, a digital image file format Browser.
    Rowberg AH; Gillespy T
    Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care; 1994; ():927-30. PubMed ID: 7950059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. [A visual displayer for publishing radiologic images on the World Wide Web].
    Setti E; Musumeci R
    Radiol Med; 2000 May; 99(5):383-7. PubMed ID: 10938708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Integration of multiple direct digital imaging sources in a picture archiving and communication system (PACS).
    Gotfredsen E; Wenzel A
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Sep; 32(5):337-42. PubMed ID: 14709611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Fraudulent use of digital radiography: methods to detect and protect digital radiographs.
    Calberson FL; Hommez GM; De Moor RJ
    J Endod; 2008 May; 34(5):530-6. PubMed ID: 18436029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Signal-to-noise ratios of 6 intraoral digital sensors.
    Attaelmanan AG; Borg E; Gröndahl HG
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 May; 91(5):611-5. PubMed ID: 11346743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Effect of Contrast Level and Image Format on a Deep Learning Algorithm for the Detection of Pneumothorax with Chest Radiography.
    Yoon MS; Kwon G; Oh J; Ryu J; Lim J; Kang BK; Lee J; Han DK
    J Digit Imaging; 2023 Jun; 36(3):1237-1247. PubMed ID: 36698035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A comparison of wavelet and Joint Photographic Experts Group lossy compression methods applied to medical images.
    Iyriboz TA; Zukoski MJ; Hopper KD; Stagg PL
    J Digit Imaging; 1999 May; 12(2 Suppl 1):14-7. PubMed ID: 10342156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Comparison of medical image classification accuracy among three machine learning methods.
    Maruyama T; Hayashi N; Sato Y; Hyuga S; Wakayama Y; Watanabe H; Ogura A; Ogura T
    J Xray Sci Technol; 2018; 26(6):885-893. PubMed ID: 30223423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Comparative study of two digital radiographic storage phosphor systems.
    Oliveira AE; de Almeida SM; Paganini GA; Haiter Neto F; Bóscolo FN
    Braz Dent J; 2000; 11(2):111-6. PubMed ID: 11210259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Technical Note: Development and validation of an open data format for CT projection data.
    Chen B; Duan X; Yu Z; Leng S; Yu L; McCollough C
    Med Phys; 2015 Dec; 42(12):6964-72. PubMed ID: 26632052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. 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]  

  • 56. [Loss of image quality due to the image output of a digital radiographic system].
    Jungnickel K; Redlich U
    Z Med Phys; 2009; 19(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 19459587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Effect of noise on the compressibility and diagnostic accuracy for caries detection of digital bitewing radiographs.
    Janhom A; van der Stelt PF; van Ginkel FC; Geraets WG
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jan; 28(1):6-12. PubMed ID: 10202472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Detection of Simulated Periapical Lesion in Intraoral Digital Radiography with Different Brightness and Contrast.
    Gaêta-Araujo H; Nascimento EHL; Brasil DM; Gomes AF; Freitas DQ; De Oliveira-Santos C
    Eur Endod J; 2019; 4(3):133-138. PubMed ID: 32161900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Endodontic working length assessment. Comparison of storage phosphor digital imaging and radiographic film.
    Cederberg RA; Tidwell E; Frederiksen NL; Benson BW
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Mar; 85(3):325-8. PubMed ID: 9540092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Effect of combined digital imaging parameters on endodontic file measurements.
    de Oliveira ML; Pinto GC; Ambrosano GM; Tosoni GM
    J Endod; 2012 Oct; 38(10):1404-7. PubMed ID: 22980188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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