108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9227257)
1. Evaluation of a new ultraviolet-emitting rare-earth film-screen combination.
Farajollahi AR; Sutton D
Br J Radiol; 1997 Jun; 70(834):629-34. PubMed ID: 9227257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Image quality and patient dose for different screen-film combinations.
Guibelalde E; Fernández JM; Vañó E; Llorca A; Ruiz MJ
Br J Radiol; 1994 Feb; 67(794):166-73. PubMed ID: 8130979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. [Experiences with a new film-screen system in pediatric thoracic radiography].
Leenen A; Brandt GA; Riebel T; Marciniak H
Rofo; 1996 Oct; 165(4):349-52. PubMed ID: 8963046
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [A new rare earth intensifying screen: lanthanum oxybromide (Quanta III - Dupont): relative speed, resolution and image quality (author's transl)].
Bergamini C; Laudicina L; Marengo M; Pavlica P; Viglietta G; Zanini M
Radiol Med; 1980 Oct; 66(10):699-704. PubMed ID: 7221029
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Comparative evaluation of several rare-earth film-screen systems.
Braun M; Wilson BC
Radiology; 1982 Sep; 144(4):915-9. PubMed ID: 7111746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [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]
12. [Determination of absorbed doses of radiation during lateral cephalometric radiography].
Patsakas AJ; Donta CN; Tsiklakis KD
Hell Period Stomat Gnathopathoprosopike Cheir; 1989 Jun; 4(2):91-5. PubMed ID: 2640655
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Optimisation of patient radiation protection in conventional X-ray imaging procedures using film reject analysis: a demonstration of the importance of rare earth screen-film systems.
Inkoom S; Schandorf C; Fletcher JJ
Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2009 Sep; 136(3):196-202. PubMed ID: 19737839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Optimization of the thoracic radiograph. Experimental and clinical study on the use of various film/screen combinations using rare earths].
Bergonzini R; Gallini R; Giugni U; Robecchi D; Amato M
Radiol Med; 1986 May; 72(5):261-6. PubMed ID: 3715076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Demonstration of correlations between clinical and physical image quality measures in chest and lumbar spine screen-film radiography.
Sandborg M; Tingberg A; Dance DR; Lanhede B; Almén A; McVey G; Sund P; Kheddache S; Besjakov J; Mattsson S; Månsson LG; Alm Carlsson G
Br J Radiol; 2001 Jun; 74(882):520-8. PubMed ID: 11459731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. An investigation into the radiation dose associated with different imaging systems for chest radiology.
Marshall NW; Faulkner K; Busch HP; Marsh DM; Pfenning H
Br J Radiol; 1994 Apr; 67(796):353-9. PubMed ID: 8173876
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A study and optimization of lumbar spine X-ray imaging systems.
McVey G; Sandborg M; Dance DR; Alm Carlsson G
Br J Radiol; 2003 Mar; 76(903):177-88. PubMed ID: 12684233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Image quality and breast dose of 24 screen-film combinations for mammography.
Dimakopoulou AD; Tsalafoutas IA; Georgiou EK; Yakoumakis EN
Br J Radiol; 2006 Feb; 79(938):123-9. PubMed ID: 16489193
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Short communication: use of the European image quality criteria for screen-film comparison--application for asymmetric systems.
Guibelalde E; Morillo A; Fernandez JM; Vañó E
Br J Radiol; 1996 Jan; 69(817):64-9. PubMed ID: 8785624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
