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 *

126 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38845966)

  • 1. Comparing desktop 3D virtual reality with web 2.0 interfaces: Identifying key factors behind enhanced user capabilities.
    Sudár A; Csapó ÁB
    Heliyon; 2024 Jun; 10(11):e31717. PubMed ID: 38845966
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 3D virtual reality vs. 2D desktop registration user interface comparison.
    Bueckle A; Buehling K; Shih PC; Börner K
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(10):e0258103. PubMed ID: 34705835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparing virtual reality, desktop-based 3D, and 2D versions of a category learning experiment.
    Barrett RCA; Poe R; O'Camb JW; Woodruff C; Harrison SM; Dolguikh K; Chuong C; Klassen AD; Zhang R; Joseph RB; Blair MR
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(10):e0275119. PubMed ID: 36201546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Desktop VR Is Better Than Non-ambulatory HMD VR for Spatial Learning.
    Srivastava P; Rimzhim A; Vijay P; Singh S; Chandra S
    Front Robot AI; 2019; 6():50. PubMed ID: 33501066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Immersive and desktop virtual reality in virtual fashion stores: a comparison between shopping experiences.
    Ricci M; Evangelista A; Di Roma A; Fiorentino M
    Virtual Real; 2023 May; ():1-16. PubMed ID: 37360805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Creating 3D models from Radiologic Images for Virtual Reality Medical Education Modules.
    Ammanuel S; Brown I; Uribe J; Rehani B
    J Med Syst; 2019 May; 43(6):166. PubMed ID: 31053902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. DICOM 3D viewers, virtual reality or 3D printing - a pilot usability study for assessing the preference of orthopedic surgeons.
    Popescu D; Marinescu R; Laptoiu D; Deac GC; Cotet CE
    Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2021 Sep; 235(9):1014-1024. PubMed ID: 34176364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The Present and Future of Virtual Reality in Medical Education: A Narrative Review.
    Mistry D; Brock CA; Lindsey T
    Cureus; 2023 Dec; 15(12):e51124. PubMed ID: 38274907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Understanding cancer patient cohorts in virtual reality environment for better clinical decisions: a usability study.
    Qu Z; Nguyen QV; Lau CW; Johnston A; Kennedy PJ; Simoff S; Catchpoole D
    BMC Med Inform Decis Mak; 2023 Dec; 23(1):295. PubMed ID: 38124044
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Stereoscopic virtual reality does not improve knowledge acquisition of congenital heart disease.
    Patel N; Costa A; Sanders SP; Ezon D
    Int J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2021 Jul; 37(7):2283-2290. PubMed ID: 33677745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Introducing 3D Thumbnails to Access 360-Degree Videos in Virtual Reality.
    Vermast A; Hurst W
    IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph; 2023 Feb; PP():. PubMed ID: 37027582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of immersive visualization technologies on cognitive load, motivation, usability, and embodiment.
    Wenk N; Penalver-Andres J; Buetler KA; Nef T; Müri RM; Marchal-Crespo L
    Virtual Real; 2023; 27(1):307-331. PubMed ID: 36915633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. EEG-based cognitive load of processing events in 3D virtual worlds is lower than processing events in 2D displays.
    Dan A; Reiner M
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2017 Dec; 122():75-84. PubMed ID: 27592084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Using virtual 3D-models in surgical planning: workflow of an immersive virtual reality application in liver surgery.
    Boedecker C; Huettl F; Saalfeld P; Paschold M; Kneist W; Baumgart J; Preim B; Hansen C; Lang H; Huber T
    Langenbecks Arch Surg; 2021 May; 406(3):911-915. PubMed ID: 33710462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Using virtual reality for anatomical landmark annotation in geometric morphometrics.
    Messer D; Atchapero M; Jensen MB; Svendsen MS; Galatius A; Olsen MT; Frisvad JR; Dahl VA; Conradsen K; Dahl AB; Bærentzen A
    PeerJ; 2022; 10():e12869. PubMed ID: 35186472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A Brave New World: Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Systems Biology.
    Turhan B; Gümüş ZH
    Front Bioinform; 2022 Apr; 2():. PubMed ID: 35647580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Design and validation of a 3D virtual reality desktop system for sonographic length and volume measurements in early pregnancy evaluation.
    Baken L; van Gruting IM; Steegers EA; van der Spek PJ; Exalto N; Koning AH
    J Clin Ultrasound; 2015 Mar; 43(3):164-70. PubMed ID: 25041997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The Hologram in My Hand: How Effective is Interactive Exploration of 3D Visualizations in Immersive Tangible Augmented Reality?
    Bach B; Sicat R; Beyer J; Cordeil M; Pfister H
    IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph; 2018 Jan; 24(1):457-467. PubMed ID: 28866590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparing Desktop vs. Mobile Interaction for the Creation of Pervasive Augmented Reality Experiences.
    Madeira T; Marques B; Neves P; Dias P; Santos BS
    J Imaging; 2022 Mar; 8(3):. PubMed ID: 35324634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Modulation of cortical activity in 2D versus 3D virtual reality environments: an EEG study.
    Slobounov SM; Ray W; Johnson B; Slobounov E; Newell KM
    Int J Psychophysiol; 2015 Mar; 95(3):254-60. PubMed ID: 25448267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.