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.
3. Some characteristics of solid-state and photo-stimulable phosphor detectors for intra-oral radiography. Borg E Swed Dent J Suppl; 1999; 139():i-viii, 1-67. PubMed ID: 10635104 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Low-dose radiography of scoliosis in children. A comparison of methods. Kalmar JA; Jones JP; Merritt CR Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1994 Apr; 19(7):818-23. PubMed ID: 8202801 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Quality of digital pre-implant tomography: comparison of film-screen images with storage phosphor images at normal and low dose. Ekestubbe A; Gröndahl HG; Molander B Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2003 Sep; 32(5):322-6. PubMed ID: 14709608 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Computed radiography in scoliosis. Diagnostic information and radiation dose. Jónsson A; Jonsson K; Eklund K; Holje G; Pettersson H Acta Radiol; 1995 Jul; 36(4):429-33. PubMed ID: 7619625 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Scoliosis examinations: organ dose and image quality with rare-earth screen-film systems. Fearon T; Vucich J; Butler P; McSweeney WJ; Taylor GA; Markle BM; Hoe J AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1988 Feb; 150(2):359-62. PubMed ID: 3257326 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [An economic comparison between digital luminescence radiography and conventional film processing in intensive care medicine]. Peters PE; Dykstra DE; Wiesmann W; Schlüchtermann J; Adam D Radiologe; 1992 Nov; 32(11):536-40. PubMed ID: 1461981 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Lumbar spine radiography: digital flat-panel detector versus screen-film and storage-phosphor systems in monkeys as a pediatric model. Ludwig K; Ahlers K; Wormanns D; Freund M; Bernhardt TM; Diederich S; Heindel W Radiology; 2003 Oct; 229(1):140-4. PubMed ID: 12925714 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical comparison of conventional and rare earth screen-film systems for cephalometric radiographs. Kaugars GE; Fatouros P Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1982 Mar; 53(3):322-5. PubMed ID: 6950349 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prospective randomized comparison of radiation exposure from full spine radiographs obtained in three different techniques. Kluba T; Schäfer J; Hahnfeldt T; Niemeyer T Eur Spine J; 2006 Jun; 15(6):752-6. PubMed ID: 16758107 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Radiation dose and image quality in diagnostic radiology. Optimization of the dose-image quality relationship with clinical experience from scoliosis radiography, coronary intervention and a flat-panel digital detector. Geijer H Acta Radiol Suppl; 2002 Mar; 43(427):1-43. PubMed ID: 12108231 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Image quality and radiation exposure in digital mammography with storage phosphor screens in a magnification technic]. Fiedler E; Aichinger U; Böhner C; Säbel M; Schulz-Wendtland R; Bautz W Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):60-4. PubMed ID: 10464507 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [The reduction of the radiation dosage by means of storage phosphor-film radiography compared to a conventional film-screen system with a grid cassette on a skull phantom]. Heyne JP; Merbold H; Sehner J; Neumann R; Freesmeyer M; Jonetz-Mentzel L; Kaiser WA Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):54-9. PubMed ID: 10464506 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reduction of radiation dose and imaging costs in scoliosis radiography. Application of large-screen image intensifier photofluorography. Manninen H; Kiekara O; Soimakallio S; Vainio J Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1988 Apr; 13(4):409-12. PubMed ID: 3406849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]