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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6718486)

  • 1. Energy imparted to fluorescent screens from primary and scattered radiation. Variations with atomic composition and screen thickness.
    Nielsen B; Carlsson CA
    Phys Med Biol; 1984 Apr; 29(4):315-28. PubMed ID: 6718486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Response of x-ray intensifying screens to scattered and primary radiation.
    Koedooder K; Venema HW
    Phys Med Biol; 1984 Oct; 29(10):1237-48. PubMed ID: 6494250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Dose efficiency of screen-film systems used in pediatric radiography.
    Cohen G; Wagner LK; McDaniel DL; Robinson LH
    Radiology; 1984 Jul; 152(1):187-93. PubMed ID: 6729110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sensitivity of radiographic screens to scattered radiation and its relationship to image contrast.
    Castle JW
    Radiology; 1977 Mar; 122(3):805-9. PubMed ID: 841075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. [X-ray intensifying screens: their effect on the quality of the image and the degree of irradiation].
    Tombak MI; Vlasov PV; Gurvich AM; Gurevich IA; Katomina RV
    Vestn Rentgenol Radiol; 1984; (5):80-4. PubMed ID: 6528468
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rare-earth screens versus calcium tungstate screens.
    Wilson RA
    Radiology; 1983 Apr; 147(1):288-9. PubMed ID: 6828754
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative performance of x-ray-intensifying screens.
    Burgess AE; Hicken P
    Radiology; 1982 May; 143(2):551-6. PubMed ID: 7071362
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical comparison of high-speed rare-earth screen and par-speed screen for diagnostic efficacy and radiation dosage.
    Robinson T; Becker JA; Olson AP
    Radiology; 1982 Oct; 145(1):214-6. PubMed ID: 6821592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Improved portal film image quality in radiation therapy with high energy photons.
    Kihlén B; Cederlund T; Lagergren C; Nordell B; Rudén BI
    Acta Oncol; 1991; 30(3):369-73. PubMed ID: 1903633
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Plain radiography with a rare-earth screen: comparison with calcium tungstate screen.
    Picus D; McAlister WH; Smith E; Rodewald S; Jost RG; Evens RG
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1984 Dec; 143(6):1335-8. PubMed ID: 6333800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Scatter/primary ratios for x-ray spectra modified to enhance iodine contrast in screen-film mammography.
    Fritz SL; Chang CH; Livingston WH
    Med Phys; 1983; 10(6):866-70. PubMed ID: 6656696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of rare earth intensifying screens in cephalometric radiography.
    Stathopoulos V; Poulton DR
    Angle Orthod; 1990; 60(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 2180348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Blurring artifacts in megavoltage radiography with a flat-panel imaging system: comparison of Monte Carlo simulations with measurements.
    Schach von Wittenau AE; Logan CM; Aufderheide MB; Slone DM
    Med Phys; 2002 Nov; 29(11):2559-70. PubMed ID: 12462723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A Monte Carlo study of x-ray fluorescence in x-ray detectors.
    Boone JM; Seibert JA; Sabol JM; Tecotzky M
    Med Phys; 1999 Jun; 26(6):905-16. PubMed ID: 10436891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparative evaluation of rare-earth screen-film systems. System speed, contrast, sensitometry, RMS noise, square-wave response function, and contrast-dose-detail analysis.
    Fearon T; Vucich J; Hoe J; McSweeney WJ; Potter BM
    Invest Radiol; 1986 Aug; 21(8):654-62. PubMed ID: 3744739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. An evaluation of the Y2O3:Eu3+ scintillator for application in medical x-ray detectors and image receptors.
    Cavouras D; Kandarakis I; Panayiotakis GS; Evangelou EK; Nomicos CD
    Med Phys; 1996 Dec; 23(12):1965-75. PubMed ID: 8994161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Technique charts for EC film: direct optical measurements to account for the effects of X-ray scatter.
    Munro P; Jordan K; Lewis C; Heerema T
    Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2001 Jul; 50(3):829-36. PubMed ID: 11395253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of x-radiation doses between conventional and rare earth panoramic radiographic techniques.
    Skoczylas LJ; Preece JW; Langlais RP; McDavid WD; Waggener RG
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Dec; 68(6):776-81. PubMed ID: 2594329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Monte Carlo calculation for microplanar beam radiography.
    Company FZ; Allen BJ; Mino C
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 2000 Sep; 23(3):88-93. PubMed ID: 11210159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.