125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38141429)
1. Gridless adult cervical spine radiography and its' effect on image quality and radiation dose: A phantom study.
Mekis N; Bianchi T; Doyle C; Gauchat M; Geerling I; Linneman J; Staats S; Campeanu C
Radiography (Lond); 2024 Jan; 30(1):359-366. PubMed ID: 38141429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The impact of X-ray scatter correction software on abdomen radiography in terms of image quality and radiation dose.
Sayed M; Knapp KM; Fulford J; Heales C; Alqahtani SJ
Radiography (Lond); 2024 May; 30(4):1125-1135. PubMed ID: 38797045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Optimisation of the lateral lumbar spine projection using an air-gap technique.
Bellizzi A; Zarb F
Radiography (Lond); 2020 Aug; 26(3):227-233. PubMed ID: 32052755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluating the use of anti-scatter grids in adult knee radiography.
Abela N; Guilherme Couto J; Zarb F; Mizzi D
Radiography (Lond); 2022 Aug; 28(3):663-667. PubMed ID: 35623269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluating the use of higher kVp and copper filtration as a dose optimisation tool in digital planar radiography.
Mifsud K; Portelli JL; Zarb F; Couto JG
Radiography (Lond); 2022 Aug; 28(3):586-592. PubMed ID: 35504239
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effective dose reduction in spine radiographic imaging by choosing the less radiation-sensitive side of the body.
Ben-Shlomo A; Bartal G; Mosseri M; Avraham B; Leitner Y; Shabat S
Spine J; 2016 Apr; 16(4):558-63. PubMed ID: 26704861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Optimisation of the AP abdomen projection for larger patient body thicknesses.
Gatt S; Portelli JL; Zarb F
Radiography (Lond); 2022 Feb; 28(1):107-114. PubMed ID: 34544645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A phantom study on dose efficiency for orthopedic applications: Comparing slot-scanning radiography using ultra-small-angle tomosynthesis to conventional radiography.
Luckner C; Weber T; Herbst M; Ritschl L; Kappler S; Maier A
Med Phys; 2021 May; 48(5):2170-2184. PubMed ID: 33368397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparing the standard knee X-ray exposure factor, 10 kV rule, and modified 10 kV rule techniques in digital radiography to reduce patient radiation dose without loss of image quality.
Wenman A; Lockwood P
Radiography (Lond); 2024 Mar; 30(2):574-581. PubMed ID: 38295494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The effect of breast shielding outside the field of view on breast entrance surface dose in axial X-ray examinations: a phantom study.
Hurley L; Alashban Y; Albeshan S; England A; McEntee MF
Diagn Interv Radiol; 2023 May; 29(3):555-560. PubMed ID: 37129301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Dose reduction through gridless technique in digital full-field mammography].
Diekmann F; Diekmann S; Berzeg S; Bick U; Fischer T; Hamm B
Rofo; 2003 Jun; 175(6):769-74. PubMed ID: 12811688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Optimisation of exposure parameters using a phantom for thoracic spine radiographs in antero-posterior and lateral views.
Sá Dos Reis C; Caso M; Dolenc L; Howick K; Lemmen R; Meira A; Shatku F; Aymon E; Ghotra SS
Radiography (Lond); 2023 Aug; 29(5):870-877. PubMed ID: 37419047
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Iterative scatter correction for grid-less skeletal radiography allows improved image quality equal to an antiscatter grid in adjunct with dose reduction: a visual grading study of 20 body donors.
Lisson CG; Lisson CS; Kleiner S; Regier M; Beer M; Schmidt SA
Acta Radiol; 2019 Jun; 60(6):735-741. PubMed ID: 30149748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of Virtual Grid processed clinical pelvic radiographs.
Gossye T; Buytaert D; Smeets PV; Morbée L; Vereecke E; Kellens PJ; Achten E; Bacher K
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2024 Jun; 25(6):e14353. PubMed ID: 38693646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of anteroposterior and posteroanterior projection in lumbar spine radiography.
Alukic E; Skrk D; Mekis N
Radiol Oncol; 2018 May; 52(4):468-474. PubMed ID: 30511934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. How does a non-optimal tube potential influence radiation dose to the patient in lumbar spine radiography?
Alukic E; Mekis N
Radiography (Lond); 2021 Nov; 27(4):1105-1109. PubMed ID: 34011453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Impact of Software Parameter Settings on Image Quality of Virtual Grid Processed Radiography Images: A Contrast-Detail Phantom Study.
Gossye T; Smeets PV; Achten E; Bacher K
Invest Radiol; 2020 Jun; 55(6):374-380. PubMed ID: 31985603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effective dose and image optimisation of lateral lumbar spine radiography: a phantom study.
Lai ZH; Sá Dos Reis C; Sun Z
Eur Radiol Exp; 2020 Feb; 4(1):13. PubMed ID: 32056045
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Radiation dose estimation of patients undergoing lumbar spine radiography.
Gyekye PK; Simon A; Geoffrey ER; Johnson Y; Stephen I; Engmann CK; Samuel WG
J Med Phys; 2013 Oct; 38(4):185-8. PubMed ID: 24672153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical application of the optimized X-ray parameter model through analysis of disease risk and image quality when combining the ion chamber of automatic exposure control of digital radiography.
Hwang JH; Kim SB; Choi MK; Lee KB; Park CK
J Xray Sci Technol; 2022; 30(6):1099-1114. PubMed ID: 36120755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
