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 *

114 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9364589)

  • 1. A time-scale sensitometric method for evaluating screen-film systems.
    Góes EG; Pelá CA; Ghilardi NT
    Phys Med Biol; 1997 Oct; 42(10):1939-46. PubMed ID: 9364589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of light and x-ray sensitometric responses of double-emulsion films for different processing conditions.
    Blendl C; Buhr E
    Med Phys; 2001 Dec; 28(12):2420-6. PubMed ID: 11797944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Problems associated with simulated light sensitometry for low-crossover medical x-ray films.
    Haus AG; Dickerson RE
    Med Phys; 1990; 17(4):691-5. PubMed ID: 2215416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Modified inverse square sensitometry for the determination of the characteristic curve of radiographic screen/film systems.
    Yoshida A; Hiraki Y; Ohkawa Y; Yamada T; Hashimoto K; Aono K
    Acta Med Okayama; 1986 Feb; 40(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 3962729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Method of simulated screen sensitometry for asymmetric, low crossover medical x-ray films.
    Dickerson RE; Haus AG; Baker CW
    Med Phys; 1994 Apr; 21(4):525-8. PubMed ID: 8058018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sensitometric responses of selected medical radiographic films.
    Kofler JM; Gray JE
    Radiology; 1991 Dec; 181(3):879-83. PubMed ID: 1947114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [The evaluation of the performance of a new-concept screen-film system].
    Tosi G; Brambilla MG; De Crescenzo S
    Radiol Med; 1992 Nov; 84(5):641-4. PubMed ID: 1475429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Characteristics of sensitometric curves of radiographic films.
    Zhu XR; Yoo S; Jursinic PA; Grimm DF; Lopez F; Rownd JJ; Gillin MT
    Med Phys; 2003 May; 30(5):912-9. PubMed ID: 12773000
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Processor quality control in laser imaging systems.
    Bogucki TM; Murphy WR; Baker CW; Piazza SS; Haus AG
    Med Phys; 1997 Apr; 24(4):581-4. PubMed ID: 9127311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Film-screen systems: sensitometric comparison of Kodak Ektavision system to Kodak T-Mat/RA system.
    Thunthy KH; Weinberg R
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1997 Feb; 83(2):288-92. PubMed ID: 9117763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. An examination of errors in characteristic curve measurements of radiographic screen/film systems.
    Wagner LK; Barnes GT; Bencomo JA; Haus AG
    Med Phys; 1983; 10(3):365-9. PubMed ID: 6877185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparative evaluation of the sensitometric properties of screen-film systems and conventional dental receptors for intraoral radiography.
    Kircos LT; Staninec M; Chou L
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Dec; 68(6):787-92. PubMed ID: 2594331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Dose and energy dependence of response of Gafchromic XR-QA film for kilovoltage x-ray beams.
    Rampado O; Garelli E; Deagostini S; Ropolo R
    Phys Med Biol; 2006 Jun; 51(11):2871-81. PubMed ID: 16723772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Sensitometric effects of varying the intensifying screens used with Agfa Dentus ST8G and RP6 panoramic radiographic films.
    Wakoh M; Farman AG; Scarfe WC; Kitagawa H; Kuroyanagi K
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 Jul; 26(4):225-9. PubMed ID: 9442613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Using light sensitometry to evaluate mammography film performance.
    West MS; Spelic DC
    Med Phys; 2000 May; 27(5):854-60. PubMed ID: 10841387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Normalized sensitometric curves for the verification of hybrid IMRT treatment plans with multiple energies.
    Georg D; Kroupa B; Winkler P; Pötter R
    Med Phys; 2003 Jun; 30(6):1142-50. PubMed ID: 12852539
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of kilovoltage and filtration on dental radiographic film sensitivity.
    Price C
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1982 Mar; 53(3):318-21. PubMed ID: 6950348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The calibration of experimental self-developing Gafchromic HXR film for the measurement of radiation dose in computed tomography.
    Gorny KR; Leitzen SL; Bruesewitz MR; Kofler JM; Hangiandreou NJ; McCollough CH
    Med Phys; 2005 Apr; 32(4):1010-6. PubMed ID: 15895584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A sensitometric comparison of Fuji Super HR-G and Kodak T-mat G panoramic films.
    Benson BW; Frederiksen NL
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1995 May; 79(5):646-8. PubMed ID: 7600231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.