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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7232738)

  • 21. Evaluation of a new x-ray film with reduced crossover.
    Rao GU; Fatouros PP
    Med Phys; 1979; 6(3):226-8. PubMed ID: 470848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Physical characteristics of modern radiographic screen-film systems.
    Rao GU; Fatouros PP; James AE
    Invest Radiol; 1978; 13(5):460-9. PubMed ID: 753799
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Portable chest imaging: comparison of storage phosphor digital, asymmetric screen-film, and conventional screen-film systems.
    Niklason LT; Chan HP; Cascade PN; Chang CL; Chee PW; Mathews JF
    Radiology; 1993 Feb; 186(2):387-93. PubMed ID: 8421740
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Comparison of film-screen combinations in contrast-detail diagram and with interactive image analysis. 3: Trimodal histograms of gray scale distribution in bar groups of lead pattern images].
    Hagemann G; Eichbaum G; Stamm G
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1998 May; 8(3):151-6. PubMed ID: 9645256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Comparison of film-screen combinations with contrast detail diagram and interactive image analysis. 2: Linear assessment of grey scale ranges with interactive image analysis].
    Stamm G; Eichbaum G; Hagemann G
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1997 Sep; 7(5):284-7. PubMed ID: 9410005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Physical imaging properties of a flat panel X-ray detector system].
    Yoshida A; Nakamura S; Nishihara S; Kohama C; Takahata A; Fujikawa K
    Igaku Butsuri; 2002; 22(4):246-54. PubMed ID: 12766270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The energy-dependent behavior of noise Wiener spectra in their low-frequency limits: comparison with simple theory.
    Vyborny CJ; Loo LN; Doi K
    Radiology; 1982 Aug; 144(3):619-22. PubMed ID: 7100480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Selection of optimal screen-film combination for use in the neonatal intensive care unit.
    Smith WL; Franken EA; Frangi SM; Windsor C
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1982 Dec; 139(6):1051-3. PubMed ID: 6756100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Wiener spectra of roentgen film-screen combinations].
    Mirandé W; Hoeschen D
    Rontgenblatter; 1985 Mar; 38(3):81-4. PubMed ID: 3992138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Prospects for x-ray exposure reduction using rare earth intensifying screens.
    Wagner RF; Weaver KE
    Radiology; 1976 Jan; 118(1):183-8. PubMed ID: 1244656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. [Diagnosis of metastases in thoracic images. Progress by further development of the conventional film-foil technique?].
    Lehmann KJ; Himmighöfer U
    Radiologe; 1994 Oct; 34(10):592-8. PubMed ID: 7816917
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Radiographic mottle: a comprehensive theory.
    Barnes GT
    Med Phys; 1982; 9(5):656-67. PubMed ID: 7155067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Examinations of rare-earth film-screen-systems for image detectors in mammography (author's transl)].
    Weberling R
    Rontgenblatter; 1979 Mar; 32(3):109-16. PubMed ID: 432483
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparative evaluation of several rare-earth film-screen systems.
    Braun M; Wilson BC
    Radiology; 1982 Sep; 144(4):915-9. PubMed ID: 7111746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Dose reduction in patients undergoing chest imaging: digital amorphous silicon flat-panel detector radiography versus conventional film-screen radiography and phosphor-based computed radiography.
    Bacher K; Smeets P; Bonnarens K; De Hauwere A; Verstraete K; Thierens H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2003 Oct; 181(4):923-9. PubMed ID: 14500203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Comparison of film-screen combination in a contrast detail diagram and with interactive image analysis. 1: Contrast detail diagram].
    Hagemann G; Eichbaum G
    Aktuelle Radiol; 1997 Jul; 7(4):212-5. PubMed ID: 9340021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Clinical comparative study with a large-area amorphous silicon flat-panel detector: image quality and visibility of anatomic structures on chest radiography.
    Fink C; Hallscheidt PJ; Noeldge G; Kampschulte A; Radeleff B; Hosch WP; Kauffmann GW; Hansmann J
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2002 Feb; 178(2):481-6. PubMed ID: 11804922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The effects of the film/screen combination on tomographic image quality.
    Cohen G; Barnes JO; Peña PM
    Radiology; 1978 Nov; 129(2):515-20. PubMed ID: 704869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.