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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3860251)

  • 21. Comparative reject analysis in conventional film-screen and digital storage phosphor radiography.
    Peer S; Peer R; Giacomuzzi SM; Jaschke W
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2001; 94(1-2):69-71. PubMed ID: 11487846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Exposure reduction in cephalometric radiology: a comprehensive approach.
    Tyndall DA; Matteson SR; Soltmann RE; Hamilton TL; Proffit WR
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1988 May; 93(5):400-12. PubMed ID: 3163219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effect of image quality on the identification of cephalometric landmarks.
    McWilliam JS; Welander U
    Angle Orthod; 1978 Jan; 48(1):49-56. PubMed ID: 272131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography.
    Dimakopoulou AD; Tsalafoutas IA; Georgiou EK; Yakoumakis EN
    Br J Radiol; 2006 Feb; 79(938):123-9. PubMed ID: 16489193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [The clinical evaluation of cephalograms using the single screen/single emulsion film system for improving image quality].
    Tanimoto K; Yamada K; Kodera Y; Imagawa H; Yoneda H; Sunayashiki T; Ogawa M; Wada T; Yamauchi K
    Nihon Kyosei Shika Gakkai Zasshi; 1986 Mar; 45(1):48-55. PubMed ID: 3458848
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Measurement of objective parameters of image quality of film-screen combinations].
    Angerstein W; Wolf M
    Radiol Diagn (Berl); 1986; 27(1):69-76. PubMed ID: 3961142
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Sensitometric comparison of direct- and indirect-exposure films used in intraoral radiography.
    Hashimoto K; Thunthy KH; Iwai K; Ejima K; Weinberg R
    J Nihon Univ Sch Dent; 1992 Jun; 34(2):106-10. PubMed ID: 1500950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Resolution of several screen-film combinations in rotational panoramic radiography.
    McDavid WD; Morris CR; Tronje G; Welander U
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1986 Jun; 61(6):629-34. PubMed ID: 3459994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Image contrast in various cassette-screen-film combinations].
    Barth HH; Grasser H
    Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1985 Dec; 40(12):1230-4. PubMed ID: 3869536
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. High-speed, single-screen/single-emulsion film systems: basic imaging properties and preliminary clinical applications.
    Higashida Y; Frank PH; Doi K
    Radiology; 1983 Nov; 149(2):571-7. PubMed ID: 6622705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Sensitometric properties of Agfa Dentus OrthoLux, Agfa Dentus ST8G, and Kodak Ektavision panoramic radiographic film.
    Wakoh M; Nishikawa K; Kobayashi N; Farman AG; Kuroyanagi K
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Feb; 91(2):244-51. PubMed ID: 11174605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Experimental evaluation of screen-film combinations for intraoral panoramic radiography.
    Molander B
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1986; 15(2):93-7. PubMed ID: 3470222
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Rare earth screens for panoramic radiography.
    Hurlburt CE; Coggins LJ
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1984 Apr; 57(4):451-4. PubMed ID: 6584845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Six screen-film combinations using the Oralix Pan DC.
    Kimura K; Underhill TE; Archila L; Linse JM; Langland OE
    J Nihon Univ Sch Dent; 1987 Jun; 29(2):124-31. PubMed ID: 3478427
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. A comparison between two dental films and two film-screen combinations in detecting low contrast defects and initial caries.
    Sanderink GC; Scholte CM
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1985; 14(2):113-22. PubMed ID: 3869566
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison of an asymmetric screen-film combination with a conventional screen-film combination for chest radiography in 51 patients.
    Greaney T; McCoy C; Masterson J
    Br J Radiol; 1997 Sep; 70(837):929-32. PubMed ID: 9486069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Large-screen image intensifier photofluorography compared with full-size screen-film technique in chest radiography.
    Manninen H; Rytkönen H; Soimakallio S; Terho EO; Hentunen J
    Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh); 1985; 26(5):525-33. PubMed ID: 4072746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The reduction of x-ray exposure in dental practice using rare-earth screen--fast film combinations.
    Greig DG
    Br Dent J; 1983 Jul; 155(1):17-8. PubMed ID: 6577879
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Acceptance testing and routine quality control in general radiography: mobile units and film/screen fixed systems.
    Gray L; Dowling A; Gallagher A; Gorman D; O'Connor U; Devine M; Larkin A; Walsh C; Malone JF
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2008; 129(1-3):276-8. PubMed ID: 18326885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. A dual sensitivity screen system for TMJ image enhancement in cephalometric radiography: sensitometric evaluation.
    Wakoh M; Farman AG; Nishikawa K; Kuroyanagi K; Scarfe WC; Braun S
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Aug; 24(3):191-4. PubMed ID: 8617394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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