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 *

82 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3969463)

  • 1. ROC and contrast detail image evaluation tests compared.
    Kelsey CA; Moseley RD; Garcia JF; Mettler FA; Parker TW; Juhl JH
    Radiology; 1985 Mar; 154(3):629-31. PubMed ID: 3969463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Interstitial lung diseases. A comparative study between a film-screen combination and a digital storage phosphor technic].
    Dölken W; Chowanetz W; Horwitz AE; Krahe T; Landwehr P; Lackner K
    Rofo; 1992 Jan; 156(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 1733476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Detection of simulated lung nodules evaluated with various film/screen systems].
    Li-Feng
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1997 Feb; 57(3):104-9. PubMed ID: 9077091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of radiographic image quality parameters obtained with the REX simulator.
    Magalhaes LA; Drexler GG; deAlmeida CE
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2011 Nov; 147(4):614-8. PubMed ID: 21273198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Anticrossover emulsions evaluated by observer performance tests.
    Kelsey CA; Moseley RD; Mettler FA; Garcia JF; Parker TW; Juhl JH; Briscoe DE
    Radiology; 1983 Jan; 146(1):209-11. PubMed ID: 6849047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison of the threshold detail detectability of a screen-film combination and computed radiology under conditions relevant to high-kVp chest radiography.
    Launders JH; Cowen AR
    Phys Med Biol; 1995 Aug; 40(8):1393-8. PubMed ID: 7480121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Are high-intensifying film-screen combinations suitable for the detection of fine interstitial lung changes? The results of a ROC study with an anthropomorphic thorax phantom].
    Müller RD; John V; Voss M; Buddenbrock B; Blendl C; Hirche H; Ewen K; Löhr E
    Rofo; 1993 Jul; 159(1):54-9. PubMed ID: 8334259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Thoracic radiographs with the AMBER system. A comparison of the diagnostic image quality of film-screen and storage-phosphor radiographs on the grid-partition stand and the AMBER system].
    Busch HP; Hartmann J; Freund MC; Lehmann KJ; Georgi M; Richter K
    Rofo; 1992 Mar; 156(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 1550921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [The diagnostic value of digital and conventional imaging in intravenous urography].
    Hundt C; Kohz P; Leinsinger G; Fink U; Schätzl M
    Rofo; 1995 Nov; 163(5):395-9. PubMed ID: 8527752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Direct comparison of conventional and computed radiography with a dual-image recording technique.
    MacMahon H; Sanada S; Doi K; Giger M; Xu XW; Yin FF; Montner SM; Carlin M
    Radiographics; 1991 Mar; 11(2):259-68. PubMed ID: 2028063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. [Study of X-ray filter and peak kilovoltage in film-screen chest radiographs in regard to detection of simulated pulmonary nodules: comparison between film-screen combination and FCR].
    Kiyono K; Sone S; Sakai F; Kawai T; Karakida O; Kasuga T; Hirano H; Matsumoto T
    Nihon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi; 1994 Nov; 54(13):1237-44. PubMed ID: 7610026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Irreversible data compression in chest imaging using computed radiography: an evaluation.
    Mori T; Nakata H
    J Thorac Imaging; 1994; 9(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 8114161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [-Overexposed film--underexposed film-].
    Patrux C
    Ann Radiol (Paris); 1997; 40(2):137-46. PubMed ID: 9754345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Digital slot-scan charge-coupled device radiography versus AMBER and Bucky screen-film radiography: comparison of image quality in a phantom study.
    Veldkamp WJ; Kroft LJ; Mertens BJ; Geleijns J
    Radiology; 2005 Jun; 235(3):857-66. PubMed ID: 15845787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Lung imaging in intensive medicine. A comparison of digital storage-screen imaging and conventional film-screen imaging].
    Busch HP; Winter-Nossek A; Bethke U; Kohler P; Georgi M
    Rofo; 1990 Apr; 152(4):412-6. PubMed ID: 2160100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A clinical comparison between conventional and digital mammography utilizing computed radiography.
    Brettle DS; Ward SC; Parkin GJ; Cowen AR; Sumsion HJ
    Br J Radiol; 1994 May; 67(797):464-8. PubMed ID: 8193893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. [The value of digital imaging techniques in skeletal imaging].
    Lehmann KJ; Busch HP; Sommer A; Georgi M
    Rofo; 1991 Mar; 154(3):286-91. PubMed ID: 1849297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Digital radiography using a computed tomography instrument in comparison with conventional film-screen images].
    Kalender WA; Hübener KH
    Rofo; 1984 Jan; 140(1):87-92. PubMed ID: 6420273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.