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 *

87 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9470560)

  • 1. Effects of beam collimation on image quality.
    Peterson CA; Mauriello SM; Overman VP; Platin E; Tangen CM
    J Dent Hyg; 1997; 71(2):61-70. PubMed ID: 9470560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The efficacy of caries detection using three intraoral films under different processing conditions.
    Ludlow JB; Platin E; Delano EO; Clifton L
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1997 Oct; 128(10):1401-8. PubMed ID: 9332141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of focal spot size on caries diagnosis with D and E speed images.
    Platin E; Mauriello S; Ludlow JB
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1996 Feb; 81(2):235-9. PubMed ID: 8665321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Extraoral radiographic imaging of primary caries.
    Clifton TL; Tyndall DA; Ludlow JB
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 Jul; 27(4):193-8. PubMed ID: 9780894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Evaluation of the diagnostic advantage of intraoral D and E film for detecting interproximal caries.
    Ardakani FE; Davari A; Goodarzipour D; Goodarzipour K; Fallahzadeh H
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2004 Nov; 5(4):58-70. PubMed ID: 15558091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of different background lighting conditions on diagnostic performance of digital and film images.
    Cederberg RA; Frederiksen NL; Benson BW; Shulman JD
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 Sep; 27(5):293-7. PubMed ID: 9879219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An evaluation of the diagnostic yield from bitewing radiographs of small approximal and occlusal carious lesions in a low prevalence sample in vitro using different film types and speeds.
    Ricketts DN; Whaites EJ; Kidd EA; Brown JE; Wilson RF
    Br Dent J; 1997 Jan; 182(2):51-8. PubMed ID: 9033139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Performance of film, desktop monitor and laptop displays in caries detection.
    Ludlow JB; Abreu M
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Jan; 28(1):26-30. PubMed ID: 10202475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Two- and three-dimensional imaging modalities for the detection of caries. A comparison between film, digital radiography and tuned aperture computed tomography (TACT).
    Abreu Júnior M; Tyndall DA; Platin E; Ludlow JB; Phillips C
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 May; 28(3):152-7. PubMed ID: 10740469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A clinical comparison of xeroradiography and film radiography for the detection of proximal caries.
    White SC; Gratt BM; Bauer JG
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1988 Feb; 65(2):242-8. PubMed ID: 3422729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Clinical evaluation of a samarium compound filter and E-speed film.
    Mauriello SM; Overman VP; Mann GB
    Quintessence Int; 1996 Nov; 27(11):769-73. PubMed ID: 9161270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. RVG-S, VIXA, and Ektaspeed film in detection of proximal enamel defects under orthodontic bands.
    Reichl P; Farman AG; Scarfe WC; Goldsmith LJ
    Angle Orthod; 1996; 66(1):65-72. PubMed ID: 8678348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of sensitometric and diagnostic performance of two films.
    White SC; Yoon DC
    Compend Contin Educ Dent; 2000 Jun; 21(6):530-2, 534, 536 passim. PubMed ID: 11199671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Detection of proximal carious lesions: two-film versus four-film bitewing radiography.
    Kaffe I; Gordon M; Laufer B; Littner MM
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1984 May; 57(5):567-71. PubMed ID: 6587305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A sensitometric comparison of four dental X-ray films and their diagnostic accuracy.
    Svenson B; Welander U; Shi XQ; Stamatakis H; Tronje G
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 Jul; 26(4):230-5. PubMed ID: 9442614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparative performance of digital and conventional images for detecting proximal surface caries.
    White SC; Yoon DC
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1997 Jan; 26(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 9446988
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of Kodak D-speed and E-speed x-ray film in detection of proximal caries.
    Waggoner WF; Ashton JJ
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1988; 55(6):459-62. PubMed ID: 3198837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A comparison of Ultraspeed and Ektaspeed dental x-ray film: in vitro study of the radiographic appearance of interproximal lesions.
    Kleier DJ; Hicks MJ; Flaitz CM
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1987 Mar; 63(3):381-5. PubMed ID: 3473366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Rectangular collimation and radiographic efficacy in eight general dental practices in the West Midlands.
    Thornley PH; Stewardson DA; Rout PG; Burke FJ
    Prim Dent Care; 2004 Jul; 11(3):81-6. PubMed ID: 15242564
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison between bitewing radiographs taken with rectangular and circular collimators in UK military dental practices: a retrospective study.
    Parrott LA; Ng SY
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2011 Feb; 40(2):102-9. PubMed ID: 21239573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.