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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

307 related items for PubMed ID: 12525979

  • 1. [Chest radiography: ROC phantom study of four different digital systems and one conventional radiographic system].
    Redlich U, Reissberg S, Hoeschen C, Effenberger O, Fessel A, Preuss H, Scherlach C, Döhring W.
    Rofo; 2003 Jan; 175(1):38-45. PubMed ID: 12525979
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. [Comparison of four digital and one conventional radiographic image systems for the chest in a patient study with subsequent system optimization].
    Redlich U, Hoeschen C, Effenberger O, Fessel A, Preuss H, Reissberg S, Scherlach C, Döhring W.
    Rofo; 2005 Feb; 177(2):272-8. PubMed ID: 15666237
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Assessment and optimisation of the image quality of chest-radiography systems.
    Redlich U, Hoeschen C, Doehring W.
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005 Feb; 114(1-3):264-8. PubMed ID: 15933119
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Amorphous silicon, flat-panel, x-ray detector versus storage phosphor-based computed radiography: contrast-detail phantom study at different tube voltages and detector entrance doses.
    Hamer OW, Völk M, Zorger Z, Feuerbach S, Strotzer M.
    Invest Radiol; 2003 Apr; 38(4):212-20. PubMed ID: 12649645
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Selenium radiography versus storage phosphor and conventional radiography in the detection of simulated chest lesions.
    Schaefer-Prokop CM, Prokop M, Schmidt A, Neitzel U, Galanski M.
    Radiology; 1996 Oct; 201(1):45-50. PubMed ID: 8816519
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. [Digital chest x-rays with a selenium detector: a prospective comparison with a conventional film-screen combination].
    Freund M, Reuter M, Palmié S, Harder E, Hutzelmann A, Heller M.
    Rofo; 1997 Feb; 166(2):101-7. PubMed ID: 9116250
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Digital chest radiography system with amorphous selenium flat-panel detectors: Qualitative and dosimetric comparison with a dedicated film-screen system.
    Prato A, Ropolo R, Fava C.
    Radiol Med; 2005 Feb; 110(5-6):561-73. PubMed ID: 16437042
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Chest radiography: a comparison of image quality and effective dose using four digital systems.
    Pascoal A, Lawinski CP, Mackenzie A, Tabakov S, Lewis CA.
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005 Feb; 114(1-3):273-7. PubMed ID: 15933121
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Analysis of image quality in digital chest imaging.
    De Hauwere A, Bacher K, Smeets P, Verstraete K, Thierens H.
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2005 Feb; 117(1-3):174-7. PubMed ID: 16461499
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 16.