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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7838060)

  • 41. [The use of an asymmetric film-screen combination for the imaging of round pulmonary foci].
    Müller RD; Wähling S; Hirche H; Voss M; Gocke P; Gocke C; Blendl C; Turowski B; Buddenbrock B; John V
    Rofo; 1995 Oct; 163(4):290-6. PubMed ID: 7579214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. ROC-analysis of detection performance by analogue and digital plain film systems in chest radiography.
    Müller RD; Wähling S; Hirche H; Voss M; Blendl C; Gocke C; Gocke P; Buddenbrock B; John V; Wiebringhaus R; Turowski B
    Acta Radiol; 1996 Nov; 37(6):847-54. PubMed ID: 8995453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. A comparison of digital radiography systems in terms of effective detective quantum efficiency.
    Bertolini M; Nitrosi A; Rivetti S; Lanconelli N; Pattacini P; Ginocchi V; Iori M
    Med Phys; 2012 May; 39(5):2617-27. PubMed ID: 22559632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Physical performance measures of radiographic imaging systems.
    Workman A; Brettle DS
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 May; 26(3):139-46. PubMed ID: 9442599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Chest radiographic image quality: comparison of asymmetric screen-film, digital storage phosphor, and digital selenium drum systems--preliminary study.
    Beute GH; Flynn MJ; Eyler WR; Samei E; Spizarny DL; Zylak CJ
    Radiographics; 1998; 18(3):745-54. PubMed ID: 9599395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Maximizing film contrast for scanning equalization radiography.
    Plewes DB; McFaul J; Ivanovic M
    Med Phys; 1990; 17(3):357-61. PubMed ID: 2385192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. A spatial-frequency dependent quantum accounting diagram and detective quantum efficiency model of signal and noise propagation in cascaded imaging systems.
    Cunningham IA; Westmore MS; Fenster A
    Med Phys; 1994 Mar; 21(3):417-27. PubMed ID: 8208217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Monte Carlo studies of x-ray energy absorption and quantum noise in megavoltage transmission radiography.
    Jaffray DA; Battista JJ; Fenster A; Munro P
    Med Phys; 1995 Jul; 22(7):1077-88. PubMed ID: 7565382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Flat-panel x-ray detector based on amorphous silicon versus asymmetric screen-film system: phantom study of dose reduction and depiction of simulated findings.
    Rapp-Bernhardt U; Roehl FW; Gibbs RC; Schmidl H; Krause UW; Bernhardt TM
    Radiology; 2003 May; 227(2):484-92. PubMed ID: 12676965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Selenium-based digital radiography of the chest: radiologists' preference compared with film-screen radiographs.
    Floyd CE; Baker JA; Chotas HG; Delong DM; Ravin CE
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Dec; 165(6):1353-8. PubMed ID: 7484562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. [Physics homogenization and the choice of screen-film combination in conventional thoracic radiography].
    Roversi R; Castaldini L; Guidarelli G
    Radiol Med; 1993 Dec; 86(6):885-92. PubMed ID: 8296012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Effects of geometric and screen-film unsharpness in conventional and 350-kVp chest radiography.
    Haus AG; Meyer J; North LB
    Radiology; 1980 Oct; 137(1 Pt 1):197-202. PubMed ID: 7422845
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. [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]  

  • 54. 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]  

  • 55. Using light sensitometry to evaluate mammography film performance.
    West MS; Spelic DC
    Med Phys; 2000 May; 27(5):854-60. PubMed ID: 10841387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Phototimer setup for CR imaging.
    Christodoulou EG; Goodsit MM; Chan HP; Hepburn TW
    Med Phys; 2000 Dec; 27(12):2652-8. PubMed ID: 11190947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. A framework for optimising the radiographic technique in digital X-ray imaging.
    Samei E; Dobbins JT; Lo JY; Tornai MP
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):220-9. PubMed ID: 15933112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. 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]  

  • 59. [The evaluation of the performance of a new-concept screen-film system].
    Tosi G; Brambilla MG; De Crescenzo S
    Radiol Med; 1992 Nov; 84(5):641-4. PubMed ID: 1475429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Detective quantum efficiency of photon-counting x-ray detectors.
    Tanguay J; Yun S; Kim HK; Cunningham IA
    Med Phys; 2015 Jan; 42(1):491-509. PubMed ID: 25563288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.