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.
42. [The importance of field size in the quality of intraoral radiography]. Wenzel A; Aalling C Tandlaegebladet; 1983 Sep; 87(15):509-12. PubMed ID: 6581557 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. Occlusal radiography in general dental practice. Parker ME; Crombie K J Dent Assoc S Afr; 1992 Nov; 47(11):493-7. PubMed ID: 9511629 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Using an automatic dental processor with a film transport system. Thunthy KH Quintessence Int Dent Dig; 1982 Oct; 13(10):1111-21. PubMed ID: 6959178 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. The use of film holding, beam collimating and aiming devices in bitewing radiography. A suggested design for routine and research use. Pitts NB Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1983; 12(2):77-82. PubMed ID: 6584364 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
47. A comparison of the response of storage phosphor and film radiography to small variations in X-ray exposure. Hildebolt CF; Fletcher G; Yokoyama-Crothers N; Conover GL; Vannier MW Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 May; 26(3):147-51. PubMed ID: 9442600 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Influence of time and exposure to air on radiographic contrast and relative film speed of three rapid dental film processing solutions. Matthee MJ; Seeliger JE; Prinsloo NJ; Swart NG J Dent Assoc S Afr; 1993 Jan; 48(1):5-8. PubMed ID: 9511608 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. [Density of radiographic films--with particular reference to the effect of film development]. Sewerin I Tandlaegebladet; 1986 Dec; 90(20):901-7. PubMed ID: 3472359 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. [Practical use of various types of intraoral radiographs in the daily practice of dentistry]. Silvestrini-Biavati P; Farris R; Mangino R; Mangino G; Boreani C Parodontol Stomatol (Nuova); 1984; 23(3 Suppl 3):276-7. PubMed ID: 6443513 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. The use of x-ray film by dental professionals in the United States. Platin E Tex Dent J; 2002 May; 119(5):396-400, 402. PubMed ID: 12046402 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. In vitro perception of low-contrast features in digital, film, and digitized dental radiographs: a receiver operating characteristic analysis. Grassl U; Schulze RK Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2007 May; 103(5):694-701. PubMed ID: 17466887 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Recommendations for quality assurance in dental radiography. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1983 Apr; 55(4):421-26. PubMed ID: 6574419 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
56. Quality control prevents radiographic artifacts. Weidman B; Warman E J Mass Dent Soc; 1994; 43(1):243-4. PubMed ID: 9508996 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. [Usefulness of a new industrial radiographic paper in dental radiography in place of radiographic film]. Bernhardt H; Maus G; Schienbein H Quintessenz; 1982 Dec; 33(12):2439-44. PubMed ID: 6963449 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. Microbiologic contamination during dental radiographic film processing. Stanczyk DA; Paunovich ED; Broome JC; Fatone MA Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1993 Jul; 76(1):112-9. PubMed ID: 8351107 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
59. Advances in imaging in oral medicine. Miles DA Alpha Omegan; 2001; 94(2):24-8. PubMed ID: 11480184 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]