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

108 related items for PubMed ID: 15326045

  • 1. Variation of the sensitometric characteristics of seven mammographic films with processing conditions.
    Tsalafoutas IA, Dimakopoulou AD, Koulentianos ED, Serefoglou AN, Yakoumakis EN.
    Br J Radiol; 2004 Aug; 77(920):666-71. PubMed ID: 15326045
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Characterization of the reciprocity law failure in three mammography screen-film systems.
    de Almeida A, Sobol WT, Barnes GT.
    Med Phys; 1999 May; 26(5):682-8. PubMed ID: 10360527
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Processing of mammographic films: technical and clinical considerations.
    Tabar L, Haus AG.
    Radiology; 1989 Oct; 173(1):65-9. PubMed ID: 2781032
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Effect of poor control of film processors on mammographic image quality.
    Kimme-Smith C, Sun H, Bassett LW, Gold RH.
    Radiographics; 1992 Nov; 12(6):1137-46. PubMed ID: 1439016
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Increased radiation dose at mammography due to prolonged exposure, delayed processing, and increased film darkening.
    Kimme-Smith C, Bassett LW, Gold RH, Chow S.
    Radiology; 1991 Feb; 178(2):387-91. PubMed ID: 1987598
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Sensitometric evaluation of some mammographic film-screen combinations.
    McLean D.
    Australas Phys Eng Sci Med; 1991 Sep; 14(3):157-62. PubMed ID: 1953502
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Assessment of mammographic film processor performance in a hospital and mobile screening unit.
    Murray JG, Dowsett DJ, Laird O, Ennis JT.
    Br J Radiol; 1992 Dec; 65(780):1097-101. PubMed ID: 1286417
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Effects of developer exhaustion on the sensitometric properties of four dental films.
    Syriopoulos K, Velders XL, Sanderink GC, van Ginkel FC, van der Stelt PF.
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Mar; 28(2):80-8. PubMed ID: 10522196
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Evaluation of a new mammographic film: methods and considerations.
    Tsalafoutas OA, Kolovos CA, Tsapaki V, Betsou S, Koliakou E, Maniatis PN, Xenofos S.
    Health Phys; 2008 Apr; 94(4):338-44. PubMed ID: 18332725
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Optimum processing of mammographic film.
    Sprawls P, Kitts EL.
    Radiographics; 1996 Mar; 16(2):349-54. PubMed ID: 8966292
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Sensitometric evaluation of four dental X-ray films using five processing solutions.
    Syriopoulos K, Velders XL, Sanderink GC, van Ginkel FC, van der Stelt PF.
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1999 Mar; 28(2):73-9. PubMed ID: 10522195
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Checking the consistency of sensitometers and film processors in a mammographic screening programme.
    Law J.
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Feb; 69(818):143-7. PubMed ID: 8785642
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Mammography film processor replenishment rate: bromide level monitoring.
    Kimme-Smith C, Wuelfing P, Kitts EL, Cagnon C, Basic M, Bassett L.
    Med Phys; 1997 Mar; 24(3):369-72. PubMed ID: 9089588
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 19. Sensitometric and image quality performance of "rapid" intraoral film processing techniques.
    Czajka J, Rushton VE, Shearer AC, Horner K.
    Br J Radiol; 1996 Jan; 69(817):49-58. PubMed ID: 8785621
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 6.