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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9656875)

  • 41. The accuracy of an x-ray film quality-assurance step-wedge test.
    Bloxom RM; Manson-Hing LR
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1986 Oct; 62(4):449-58. PubMed ID: 3464919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. [Efficiency of the Thai processing solution in clinical practice].
    Chongruk C
    J Dent Assoc Thai; 1989; 39(6):219-25. PubMed ID: 2640671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. The effect of automated nonroller processing on the sensitometric characteristics of 3 intraoral film types.
    Geist JR; Brand JW; Pink FE
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2003 Jul; 96(1):102-11. PubMed ID: 12847452
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. A comparison of six intra-oral X-ray films.
    Conover GL; Hildebolt CF; Anthony D
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1995 Aug; 24(3):169-72. PubMed ID: 8617390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Effects of processing conditions on mammographic image quality.
    Braeuning MP; Cooper HW; O'Brien S; Burns CB; Washburn DB; Schell MJ; Pisano ED
    Acad Radiol; 1999 Aug; 6(8):464-70. PubMed ID: 10480042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Densitometric evaluation of three intra-oral radiographic films.
    Seeliger JE; Prinsloo JJ
    J Dent Assoc S Afr; 1989 May; 44(5):177-9. PubMed ID: 2635441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Technical aspects of screen-film radiography, film processing, and quality control.
    Gray JE
    Radiographics; 1997; 17(1):177-87. PubMed ID: 9017807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Optical densities of dental resin composites: a comparison of CCD, storage phosphor, and Ektaspeed plus radiographic film.
    Farman TT; Farman AG; Scarfe WC; Goldsmith LJ
    Gen Dent; 1996; 44(6):532-7. PubMed ID: 9515395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. A comparison of Ektaspeed and Ultraspeed films using manual and automatic processing solutions.
    Fletcher JC
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1987 Jan; 63(1):94-102. PubMed ID: 3468472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Perceived quality of radiographic images after rapid processing of D- and F-speed direct-exposure intraoral x-ray films.
    Bernstein DI; Clark SJ; Scheetz JP; Farman AG; Rosenson B
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2003 Oct; 96(4):486-91. PubMed ID: 14561976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A perceptibility curve comparison of Ultra-speed and Ektaspeed Plus films.
    Tjelmeland EM; Moore WS; Hermesch CB; Buikema DJ
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 1998 Apr; 85(4):485-8. PubMed ID: 9574962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Mammographic film-processor temperature, development time, and chemistry: effect on dose, contrast, and noise.
    Kimme-Smith C; Rothschild PA; Bassett LW; Gold RH; Moler C
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1989 Jan; 152(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 2783288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. An evaluation of the effect of processing conditions on mammographic film contrast, fog levels and speed.
    McLean D
    Australas Radiol; 1992 Aug; 36(3):234-7. PubMed ID: 1445107
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. The influence of film processing temperature and time on mammographic image quality.
    Brink C; de Villiers JF; Lötter MG; van Zyl M
    Br J Radiol; 1993 Aug; 66(788):685-90. PubMed ID: 7719681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Processor quality assurance using digital imaging.
    Goren AD; Dunn SM; Van der Stelt PF
    N Y State Dent J; 1997 Apr; 63(4):42-7. PubMed ID: 9167431
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Automatic processing: effects of temperature and time changes on sensitometric properties of ULTRA-SPEED and EKTASPEED films.
    Hashimoto K; Thunthy KH; Weinberg R
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1991 Jan; 71(1):120-4. PubMed ID: 1994314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. E-speed dental films processed with rapid chemistry: a comparison with D-speed film.
    Kaffe I; Gratt BM
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1987 Sep; 64(3):367-72. PubMed ID: 3477753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Performance of seven rapid radiographic processing solutions.
    Maddalozzo D; Knoeppel RO; Schoenfeld CM
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1990 Mar; 69(3):382-7. PubMed ID: 2314865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Evaluation of radiographs developed by a new ultrarapid film processing system.
    Schmidt RA; Doi K; Sekiya M; Xu XW; Giger ML; Lu CT; Mojtahedi S; MacMahon H
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1990 May; 154(5):1107-10. PubMed ID: 2108553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. The effects of developer age on diagnostic accuracy: a study using assessment of endodontic file length.
    Syriopoulos K; Sanderink GC; Velders XL; van Ginkel FC; van der Stelt PF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Sep; 28(5):311-5. PubMed ID: 10490751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.