212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8633153)
1. Mottle on computed radiographs of the chest in pediatric patients.
Huda W; Slone RM; Belden CJ; Williams JL; Cumming WA; Palmer CK
Radiology; 1996 Apr; 199(1):249-52. PubMed ID: 8633153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of doses for bedside examinations of the chest with conventional screen-film and computed radiography: results of a randomized controlled trial.
Weatherburn GC; Bryan S; Davies JG
Radiology; 2000 Dec; 217(3):707-12. PubMed ID: 11110932
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effects of reduced exposure on computed radiography: comparison of nodule detection accuracy with conventional and asymmetric screen-film radiographs of a chest phantom.
Kimme-Smith C; Aberle DR; Sayre JW; Hart EM; Greaves SM; Brown K; Young DA; Deseran MD; Johnson T; Johnson SL
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1995 Aug; 165(2):269-73. PubMed ID: 7618538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Low-dose digital computed radiography in pediatric chest imaging.
Kogutt MS; Jones JP; Perkins DD
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1988 Oct; 151(4):775-9. PubMed ID: 3262278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Film-based chest radiography: AMBER vs asymmetric screen-film systems.
Chotas HG; Floyd CE; Ravin CE
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 Oct; 161(4):743-7. PubMed ID: 8372749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Detection of monitoring materials on bedside chest radiographs with the most recent generation of storage phosphor plates: dose increase does not improve detection performance.
Eisenhuber E; Stadler A; Prokop M; Fuchsjager M; Weber M; Schaefer-Prokop C
Radiology; 2003 Apr; 227(1):216-21. PubMed ID: 12668747
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Digital chest x-rays with a selenium detector: a prospective comparison with a conventional film-screen combination].
Freund M; Reuter M; Palmié S; Harder E; Hutzelmann A; Heller M
Rofo; 1997 Feb; 166(2):101-7. PubMed ID: 9116250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Accuracy of bedside chest hard-copy screen-film versus hard- and soft-copy computed radiographs in a medical intensive care unit: receiver operating characteristic analysis.
Kundel HL; Gefter W; Aronchick J; Miller W; Hatabu H; Whitfill CH; Miller W
Radiology; 1997 Dec; 205(3):859-63. PubMed ID: 9393548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Digital imaging with a photostimulable phosphor in the chest of newborns.
Cohen MD; Katz BP; Kalasinski LA; White SJ; Smith JA; Long B
Radiology; 1991 Dec; 181(3):829-32. PubMed ID: 1947105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of a new phosphor plate technology for neonatal portable chest radiographs.
Cohen M; Corea D; Wanner M; Karmazyn B; Gunderman R; Applegate K; Jennings SG
Acad Radiol; 2011 Feb; 18(2):197-8. PubMed ID: 21232684
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Productivity and cost assessment of computed radiography, digital radiography, and screen-film for outpatient chest examinations.
Andriole KP
J Digit Imaging; 2002 Sep; 15(3):161-9. PubMed ID: 12532253
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Assessment of the problem: pediatric doses in screen-film and digital radiography.
Huda W
Pediatr Radiol; 2004 Oct; 34 Suppl 3():S173-82; discussion S234-41. PubMed ID: 15558259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. [Photostimulation plates or conventional films for bedside chest x-ray in pediatric radiology? A comparative study of quality of image and the dose delivered to patients].
Maccia C; Docou le Pointe H; Fery-Lemonnier E; Nadeau X; Montagne JP; Charpentier E; Ariche-Cohen M; Viens-Bitker C
J Radiol; 1996 Nov; 77(11):1129-34. PubMed ID: 9033870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [High intensification film-screen systems in thoracic diagnosis. A clinical comparative study].
Schäfer CB; Sokiranski R; Claussen CD
Aktuelle Radiol; 1995 Nov; 5(6):389-93. PubMed ID: 8580141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Computed and conventional chest radiography: a comparison of image quality and radiation dose.
Ramli K; Abdullah BJ; Ng KH; Mahmud R; Hussain AF
Australas Radiol; 2005 Dec; 49(6):460-6. PubMed ID: 16351609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
