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

207 related items for PubMed ID: 2180348

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. A comparative evaluation of rare-earth screen-film systems. System speed, contrast, sensitometry, RMS noise, square-wave response function, and contrast-dose-detail analysis.
    Fearon T, Vucich J, Hoe J, McSweeney WJ, Potter BM.
    Invest Radiol; 1986 Aug; 21(8):654-62. PubMed ID: 3744739
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Plain radiography with a rare-earth screen: comparison with calcium tungstate screen.
    Picus D, McAlister WH, Smith E, Rodewald S, Jost RG, Evens RG.
    AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1984 Dec; 143(6):1335-8. PubMed ID: 6333800
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Rare-earth screens versus calcium tungstate screens.
    Wilson RA.
    Radiology; 1983 Apr; 147(1):288-9. PubMed ID: 6828754
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Rare earth screens for panoramic radiography.
    Hurlburt CE, Coggins LJ.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1984 Apr; 57(4):451-4. PubMed ID: 6584845
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. [A new rare earth intensifying screen: lanthanum oxybromide (Quanta III - Dupont): relative speed, resolution and image quality (author's transl)].
    Bergamini C, Laudicina L, Marengo M, Pavlica P, Viglietta G, Zanini M.
    Radiol Med; 1980 Oct; 66(10):699-704. PubMed ID: 7221029
    [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. The effect of image quality on the identification of cephalometric landmarks.
    McWilliam JS, Welander U.
    Angle Orthod; 1978 Jan; 48(1):49-56. PubMed ID: 272131
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. The evaluation of high-speed screen/film combinations in cephalometric radiography.
    Kimura K, Langland OE, Biggerstaff RH.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1987 Dec; 92(6):484-91. PubMed ID: 3479894
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 13. Clinical comparison of conventional and rare earth screen-film systems for cephalometric radiographs.
    Kaugars GE, Fatouros P.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1982 Mar; 53(3):322-5. PubMed ID: 6950349
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Rare-earth and calcium tungstate intensifying screens, a comparative study of relative speed, radiation doses and resolving power.
    de Carvalho A, Jørgensen J.
    Rofo; 1978 Mar; 128(3):358-63. PubMed ID: 147838
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 16.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Comparison of x-radiation doses between conventional and rare earth panoramic radiographic techniques.
    Skoczylas LJ, Preece JW, Langlais RP, McDavid WD, Waggener RG.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1989 Dec; 68(6):776-81. PubMed ID: 2594329
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Faster screen/film combinations for cephalometric radiography.
    Hurlburt CE.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1981 Dec; 52(6):661-5. PubMed ID: 6947192
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.