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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7970605)

  • 1. Effects of small angle discrepancies on interpretations of subtraction images.
    Davis M; Allen KM; Hausmann E
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Sep; 78(3):397-400. PubMed ID: 7970605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Influence of contrast enhancement and pseudocolor transformation on the diagnosis with digital subtraction images (DSI).
    Brägger U; Bürgin W; Marconi M; Häsler RU; Lang NP
    J Periodontal Res; 1994 Mar; 29(2):95-102. PubMed ID: 8158504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Analytical methodology in quantitative digital subtraction radiography: analyses of the aluminum reference wedge.
    Allen KM; Hausmann E
    J Periodontol; 1996 Dec; 67(12):1317-21. PubMed ID: 8997679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Diagnosis of alveolar bone changes with digital subtraction images and conventional radiographs. An in vitro study.
    Nicopoulou-Karayianni K; Brägger U; Bürgin W; Nielsen PM; Lang NP
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Aug; 72(2):251-6. PubMed ID: 1923405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Computer-assisted subtraction radiography in periodontal diagnosis.
    Gröndahl K
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1987; 50():1-44. PubMed ID: 3321498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Influence of variations in projection geometry and lesion size on detection of computer-simulated crestal alveolar bone lesions by subtraction radiography.
    Hausmann E; Allen KM; Piedmonte MR
    J Periodontal Res; 1991 Jan; 26(1):48-51. PubMed ID: 1825334
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Detection of experimentally induced lesions in subtraction images of cancellous alveolar bone.
    Katsarsky JW; Levine MS; Allen KM; Hausmann E
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Jun; 77(6):674-7. PubMed ID: 8065737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Computerized generation of lesion models for evaluating subtraction radiography.
    Allen KM; Hausmann E
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1990 Nov; 19(4):161-4. PubMed ID: 2097225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison between subtraction radiography and conventional radiographic interpretation during long-term evaluation of periodontal therapy in Class II furcation defects.
    Cury PR; Araujo NS; Bowie J; Sallum EA; Jeffcoat MK
    J Periodontol; 2004 Aug; 75(8):1145-9. PubMed ID: 15455744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of logarithmic contrast enhancement on subtraction images.
    Versteeg KH; van der Stelt PF
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 Oct; 80(4):479-86. PubMed ID: 8521113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of observer reliability in assessing alveolar bone changes from color-coded with subtraction radiographs.
    Shi XQ; Eklund I; Tronje G; Welander U; Stamatakis HC; Engström PE; Engström GN
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jan; 28(1):31-6. PubMed ID: 10202476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of stent versus laser- and cephalostat-aligned periapical film-positioning techniques for use in digital subtraction radiography.
    Ludlow JB; Peleaux CP
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1994 Feb; 77(2):208-15. PubMed ID: 8139840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Clinical validation of a new subtraction radiography technique for periodontal bone loss detection.
    Nummikoski PV; Steffensen B; Hamilton K; Dove SB
    J Periodontol; 2000 Apr; 71(4):598-605. PubMed ID: 10807124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Radiographic methods in the evaluation of periodontal therapy.
    Reddy MS
    J Periodontol; 1992 Dec; 63(12 Suppl):1078-84. PubMed ID: 1479529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Quantitative digital subtraction radiography for the assessment of peri-implant bone change.
    Jeffcoat MK; Reddy MS; van den Berg HR; Bertens E
    Clin Oral Implants Res; 1992 Mar; 3(1):22-7. PubMed ID: 1420723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. In vitro calibration and validation of a digital subtraction radiography system using scanned images.
    Woo BM; Zee KY; Chan FH; Corbet EF
    J Clin Periodontol; 2003 Feb; 30(2):114-8. PubMed ID: 12622852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Efficacy of quantitative digital subtraction radiography using radiographs exposed in a multicenter trial.
    Jeffcoat MK; Reddy MS; Magnusson I; Johnson B; Meredith MP; Cavanaugh PF; Gerlach RW
    J Periodontal Res; 1996 Apr; 31(3):157-60. PubMed ID: 8814584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Detection of small lesions in alveolar bone by digital subtraction radiography.
    Ying SY; Chen X; Zhang G; Cao CF
    Chin J Dent Res; 1999 May; 2(2):19-22. PubMed ID: 10863402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Are Intraoral Radiographs Accurate in Determining the Peri-implant Marginal Bone Level?
    Cassetta M; Di Giorgio R; Barbato E
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2018; 33(4):847-852. PubMed ID: 30025001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Limitations of the digital image subtraction technique in assessing alveolar bone crest changes due to misalignment errors during image capture.
    Benn DK
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1990 Aug; 19(3):97-104. PubMed ID: 2088789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.