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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9268904)

  • 1. Forced choice and ordinal discrete rating assessment of image quality: a comparison.
    Gur D; Rubin DA; Kart BH; Peterson AM; Fuhrman CR; Rockette HE; King JL
    J Digit Imaging; 1997 Aug; 10(3):103-7. PubMed ID: 9268904
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Subjective and objective assessment of image quality--a comparison.
    Good WF; Gur D; Feist JH; Thaete FL; Fuhrman CR; Britton CA; Slasky BS
    J Digit Imaging; 1994 May; 7(2):77-8. PubMed ID: 8075187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessment of visually lossless irreversible image compression: comparison of three methods by using an image-comparison workstation.
    Slone RM; Foos DH; Whiting BR; Muka E; Rubin DA; Pilgram TK; Kohm KS; Young SS; Ho P; Hendrickson DD
    Radiology; 2000 May; 215(2):543-53. PubMed ID: 10796938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of chest image interpretation with conventional, laser-printed, and high-resolution workstation images.
    Slasky BS; Gur D; Good WF; Costa-Greco MA; Harris KM; Cooperstein LA; Rockette HE
    Radiology; 1990 Mar; 174(3 Pt 1):775-80. PubMed ID: 2305061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Chest radiography: comparison of high-resolution digital displays with conventional and digital film.
    Cox GG; Cook LT; McMillan JH; Rosenthal SJ; Dwyer SJ
    Radiology; 1990 Sep; 176(3):771-6. PubMed ID: 2389035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Diagnostic usefulness of chest computed radiography--film versus cathode-ray tube images.
    Ishigaki T; Sakuma S; Endo T; Ikeda M
    J Digit Imaging; 1995 Feb; 8(1 Suppl 1):25-30. PubMed ID: 7734536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Selection of processing algorithms for digital image compression: a rank-order study.
    Holbert JM; Staiger M; Chang TS; Towers JD; Britton CA
    Acad Radiol; 1995 Apr; 2(4):273-6. PubMed ID: 9419561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Skeletal surveys for child abuse: comparison of interpretation using digitized images and screen-film radiographs.
    Youmans DC; Don S; Hildebolt C; Shackelford GD; Luker GD; McAlister WH
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1998 Nov; 171(5):1415-9. PubMed ID: 9798889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Multipoint rank-order study methodology: observer issues.
    Towers JD; Holbert JM; Britton CA; Costello P; Sciulli R; Gur D
    Invest Radiol; 2000 Feb; 35(2):125-30. PubMed ID: 10674457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. The effects of lossy compression on the detection of subtle pulmonary nodules.
    Cox GG; Cook LT; Insana MF; McFadden MA; Hall TJ; Harrison LA; Eckard DA; Martin NL
    Med Phys; 1996 Jan; 23(1):127-32. PubMed ID: 8700023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Subjective quality assessment of computed radiography hand images.
    Britton CA; Gabriele OF; Chang TS; Towers JD; Rubin DA; Good WF; Gur D
    J Digit Imaging; 1996 Feb; 9(1):21-4. PubMed ID: 8814765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Digital chest radiography with a solid-state flat-panel x-ray detector: contrast-detail evaluation with processed images printed on film hard copy.
    Chotas HG; Ravin CE
    Radiology; 2001 Mar; 218(3):679-82. PubMed ID: 11230639
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Digital radiography and conventional imaging of the chest: a comparison of observer performance.
    Thaete FL; Fuhrman CR; Oliver JH; Britton CA; Campbell WL; Feist JH; Straub WH; Davis PL; Plunkett MB
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1994 Mar; 162(3):575-81. PubMed ID: 8109499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Selection of subtle cases for observer-performance studies: the importance of knowing the true diagnosis.
    Rockette HE; King JL; Thaete FL; Fuhrman CR; Slifko RM; Gur D
    Acad Radiol; 1998 Feb; 5(2):86-92. PubMed ID: 9484540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Pneumothorax and other lung diseases: effect of altered resolution and edge enhancement on diagnosis with digitized radiographs.
    Goodman LR; Foley WD; Wilson CR; Tikofsky RS; Hoffmann RG
    Radiology; 1988 Apr; 167(1):83-8. PubMed ID: 3347752
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Observer study involving laser-digitized versus CCD-digitized images.
    Clark KW; Dawson WB; Muka E; Pilgram TK; Blaine GJ
    J Digit Imaging; 2002; 15 Suppl 1():53-6. PubMed ID: 12105697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Image quality and dose differences caused by vendor-specific image processing of neonatal radiographs.
    Sensakovic WF; O'Dell MC; Letter H; Kohler N; Rop B; Cook J; Logsdon G; Varich L
    Pediatr Radiol; 2016 Oct; 46(11):1606-13. PubMed ID: 27488507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Unified measurement of observer performance in detecting and localizing target objects on images.
    Swensson RG
    Med Phys; 1996 Oct; 23(10):1709-25. PubMed ID: 8946368
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Inter-observer variation in masked and unmasked images for quality evaluation of clinical radiographs.
    Tingberg A; Eriksson F; Medin J; Besjakov J; Båth M; Håkansson M; Sandborg M; Almén A; Lanhede B; Alm-Carlsson G; Mattsson S; Månsson LG
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005; 114(1-3):62-8. PubMed ID: 15933082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.