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

264 related items for PubMed ID: 7146416

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

  • 2. Radiographic mottle: a comprehensive theory.
    Barnes GT.
    Med Phys; 1982; 9(5):656-67. PubMed ID: 7155067
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Diagnostic quality versus patient exposure with five panoramic screen-film combinations.
    D'Ambrosio JA, Schiff TG, McDavid WD, Langland OE.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol; 1986 Apr; 61(4):409-11. PubMed ID: 3458153
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Noise transfer in screen-film subtraction radiography.
    Shaw A, Moores BM.
    Phys Med Biol; 1985 Mar; 30(3):229-38. PubMed ID: 3885267
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 10. [Image quality and radiation exposure in digital mammography with storage phosphor screens in a magnification technic].
    Fiedler E, Aichinger U, Böhner C, Säbel M, Schulz-Wendtland R, Bautz W.
    Rofo; 1999 Jul; 171(1):60-4. PubMed ID: 10464507
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Recent advances in screen-film mammography.
    Haus AG.
    Radiol Clin North Am; 1987 Sep; 25(5):913-28. PubMed ID: 3306773
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 13. Compatibility characteristics of five radiographic films utilised in Brazilian diagnostic radiology.
    Magalhaes LA, Drexler GG, de Almeida CE.
    Radiat Prot Dosimetry; 2013 Sep; 156(2):184-9. PubMed ID: 23651656
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. [Complex evaluation of film mammography imaging systems. I. Methodological principles].
    Friedrich M, Weskamp P.
    Rofo; 1984 May; 140(5):585-96. PubMed ID: 6429765
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. [Characteristics of screen-film systems for mammography in relation to a diverse modality of treatment].
    Rosselli Del Turco M, Milano F, Giani M, Bravetti P.
    Radiol Med; 1988 Apr; 75(4):390-4. PubMed ID: 3375482
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 17. Sensitometric properties of Agfa Dentus OrthoLux, Agfa Dentus ST8G, and Kodak Ektavision panoramic radiographic film.
    Wakoh M, Nishikawa K, Kobayashi N, Farman AG, Kuroyanagi K.
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod; 2001 Feb; 91(2):244-51. PubMed ID: 11174605
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Mammographic dual-screen-dual-emulsion-film combination: visibility of simulated microcalcifications and effect on image contrast.
    Kimme-Smith C, Bassett LW, Gold RH, Roe D, Orr J.
    Radiology; 1987 Nov; 165(2):313-8. PubMed ID: 3310091
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 20. [Experimental study on image quality when using screens in mammography (author's transl)].
    Maurer HJ, Goos F.
    Rofo; 1979 Mar; 130(3):347-51. PubMed ID: 155580
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 14.