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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6885469)

  • 1. Factors affecting radiation exposure and radiographic image contrast in urology.
    Wiatrowski WA; Kopp DT; Jordan DW; Barragan F
    Health Phys; 1983 Sep; 45(3):599-605. PubMed ID: 6885469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Uroradiographic dosimetry using a rare-earth screen-film system.
    Segal AJ; Maillie HD; Lemkin JA
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1982 Nov; 139(5):923-6. PubMed ID: 6981976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Diagnostic quality versus patient exposure with five panoramic screen-film combinations.
    D'Ambrosio JA; Schiff TG; McDavid WD; Langland OE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1986 Apr; 61(4):409-11. PubMed ID: 3458153
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A clinical comparison of image quality and patient exposure reduction in panoramic radiography with heavy metal filtration.
    Kapa SF; Tyndall DA
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Jun; 67(6):750-9. PubMed ID: 2740096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Radiographic mottle and patient exposure in mammography.
    Barnes GT; Chakraborty DP
    Radiology; 1982 Dec; 145(3):815-21. PubMed ID: 7146416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Dosage loads and quality of the image in mammography].
    Kozlov AP; Shishov VA; Telesh LV; Fedorov IuA
    Vestn Rentgenol Radiol; 1986; (3):74-9. PubMed ID: 3750831
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Analysis of image quality in digital chest imaging.
    De Hauwere A; Bacher K; Smeets P; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 117(1-3):174-7. PubMed ID: 16461499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effect of kilovoltage on the relative speed of rare-earth screens.
    Thunthy KH; Weinberg R
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1986; 15(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 3460902
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

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

  • 13. Reciprocity law failure for a film-screen combination: very long exposure times.
    Hale J; Thomas JW
    Health Phys; 1983 Sep; 45(3):780-2. PubMed ID: 6885487
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Impact of digital imaging on radiation doses to the patient during X-ray examination of the urinary tract.
    Sjöholm B; Geijer H; Persliden J
    Acta Radiol; 2005 Oct; 46(6):657-61. PubMed ID: 16334851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [Dose measurements in pediatric excretory urography using a new film-screen combination].
    Reither M; Brozik P; Schorn B
    Rontgenpraxis; 1983 May; 36(5):170-2. PubMed ID: 6867863
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Diagnostic quality of mammograms obtained with a new low-radiation-dose dual-screen and dual-emulsion film combination.
    Wojtasek DA; Teixidor HS; Govoni AF; Gareen IF
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1990 Feb; 154(2):265-70. PubMed ID: 2105011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Compatibility characteristics of five radiographic films utilised in Brazilian diagnostic radiology.
    Magalhaes LA; Drexler GG; de Almeida CE
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Sep; 156(2):184-9. PubMed ID: 23651656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Rare earth filters for intraoral radiography: exposure reduction as a function of kV(p) with comparisons of image quality.
    Kircos LT; Staninec M; Chou LS
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1989 May; 118(5):605-9. PubMed ID: 2715547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparative evaluation of the sensitometric properties of screen-film systems and conventional dental receptors for intraoral radiography.
    Kircos LT; Staninec M; Chou L
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Dec; 68(6):787-92. PubMed ID: 2594331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.