147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7480121)
1. 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]
2. Comparison of the low-contrast detectability of a screen-film system and third generation computed radiography.
Cook LT; Insana MF; McFadden MA; Hall TJ; Cox GG
Med Phys; 1994 May; 21(5):691-5. PubMed ID: 7935205
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluating radiographic parameters for mobile chest computed radiography: phantoms, image quality and effective dose.
Rill LN; Brateman L; Arreola M
Med Phys; 2003 Oct; 30(10):2727-35. PubMed ID: 14596311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of computed radiography and film/screen combination using a contrast-detail phantom.
Lu ZF; Nickoloff EL; So JC; Dutta AK
J Appl Clin Med Phys; 2003; 4(1):91-8. PubMed ID: 12540823
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Relative speeds of Kodak computed radiography phosphors and screen-film systems.
Huda W; Rill LN; Bruner AP
Med Phys; 1997 Oct; 24(10):1621-8. PubMed ID: 9350716
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of a photostimulable phosphor system with film for dental radiology.
Huda W; Rill LN; Benn DK; Pettigrew JC
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1997 Jun; 83(6):725-31. PubMed ID: 9195631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
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. [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]
12. A comprehensive physical image quality evaluation of a selenium based digital x-ray imaging system for thorax radiography.
Launders JH; Kengyelics SM; Cowen AR
Med Phys; 1998 Jun; 25(6):986-97. PubMed ID: 9650189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of imaging properties of a computed radiography system and screen-film systems.
Sanada S; Doi K; Xu XW; Yin FF; Giger ML; MacMahon H
Med Phys; 1991; 18(3):414-20. PubMed ID: 1870484
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The contrast-detail behaviour of a photostimulable phosphor based computed radiography system.
Marshall NW; Faulkner K; Busch HP; Lehmann KJ
Phys Med Biol; 1994 Dec; 39(12):2289-303. PubMed ID: 15551554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Optimal beam quality for chest computed radiography.
Oda N; Nakata H; Murakami S; Terada K; Nakamura K; Yoshida A
Invest Radiol; 1996 Mar; 31(3):126-31. PubMed ID: 8675419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Investigation of optimum energies for chest imaging using film-screen and computed radiography.
Honey ID; Mackenzie A; Evans DS
Br J Radiol; 2005 May; 78(929):422-7. PubMed ID: 15845936
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Threshold perception performance with computed and screen-film radiography: implications for chest radiography.
Dobbins JT; Rice JJ; Beam CA; Ravin CE
Radiology; 1992 Apr; 183(1):179-87. PubMed ID: 1549669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [New imaging methods in thoracic diagnosis. A study to evaluate digital storage screen radiography, the slit technique ("AMBER"), asymmetric ("InSight") and conventional film-screen techniques].
Lehmann KJ; Busch HP; Drescher P; Loose R; Georgi M
Aktuelle Radiol; 1993 Jan; 3(1):14-9. PubMed ID: 8448224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of an asymmetric screen-film system for chest radiography.
Morishita J; MacMahon H; Doi K; Carlin M; Sukenobu Y
Med Phys; 1994 Nov; 21(11):1769-75. PubMed ID: 7891639
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A new asymmetric screen-film combination for conventional chest radiography: evaluation in 50 patients.
Swensen SJ; Gray JE; Brown LR; Aughenbaugh GL; Harms GF; Stears J
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Mar; 160(3):483-6. PubMed ID: 8430540
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
