Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 97

1.

A comparison of five radiographic systems to D-speed film in the detection of artificial bone lesions.

Hadley DL, Replogle KJ, Kirkam JC, Best AM.

J Endod. 2008 Sep;34(9):1111-4. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2008.06.018.

PMID:
18718376
2.

A comparison of older and newer versions of intraoral digital radiography systems: diagnosing noncavitated proximal carious lesions.

Haiter-Neto F, dos Anjos Pontual A, Frydenberg M, Wenzel A.

J Am Dent Assoc. 2007 Oct;138(10):1353-9; quiz 1382-3.

PMID:
17908850
3.

Sensitivity of various radiographic methods for detection of oral cancellous bone lesions.

Parsell DE, Gatewood RS, Watts JD, Streckfus CF.

Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998 Oct;86(4):498-502.

PMID:
9798239
4.

A comprehensive in vitro study of image accuracy and quality for periodontal diagnosis. Part 1: the influence of X-ray generator on periodontal measurements using conventional and digital receptors.

Vandenberghe B, Corpas L, Bosmans H, Yang J, Jacobs R.

Clin Oral Investig. 2011 Aug;15(4):537-49. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0416-8. Epub 2010 May 5.

PMID:
20443035
5.
6.
7.

Comparison of two imaging modalities: F-speed film and digital images for detection of osseous defects in patients with interdental vertical bone defects.

Jorgenson T, Masood F, Beckerley JM, Burgin C, Parker DE.

Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007 Dec;36(8):500-5.

PMID:
18033948
8.

A comprehensive in vitro study of image accuracy and quality for periodontal diagnosis. Part 2: the influence of intra-oral image receptor on periodontal measurements.

Vandenberghe B, Bosmans H, Yang J, Jacobs R.

Clin Oral Investig. 2011 Aug;15(4):551-62. doi: 10.1007/s00784-010-0417-7. Epub 2010 May 12.

PMID:
20461423
9.

The dynamic range of digital radiographic systems: dose reduction or risk of overexposure?

Berkhout WE, Beuger DA, Sanderink GC, van der Stelt PF.

Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004 Jan;33(1):1-5.

PMID:
15140814
10.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of digital imaging by using CCD and CMOS-APS sensors with E-speed film in the detection of periapical bony lesions.

Paurazas SB, Geist JR, Pink FE, Hoen MM, Steiman HR.

Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2000 Mar;89(3):356-62.

PMID:
10710463
11.

Accuracy of Digora system in detecting artificial peri-implant bone defects.

Matsuda Y, Hanazawa T, Seki K, Sano T, Ozeki M, Okano T.

Implant Dent. 2001;10(4):265-71.

PMID:
11813668
12.

Storage-phosphor computed radiography versus film radiography in the detection of pathologic periradicular bone loss in cadavers.

Holtzmann DJ, Johnson WT, Southard TE, Khademi JA, Chang PJ, Rivera EM.

Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 1998 Jul;86(1):90-7.

PMID:
9690252
13.

Comparison of two different direct digital radiography systems for the ability to detect artificially prepared periapical lesions.

Folk RB, Thorpe JR, McClanahan SB, Johnson JD, Strother JM.

J Endod. 2005 Apr;31(4):304-6.

PMID:
15793390
14.

Comparison of observer performance in determining the position of endodontic files with physical measures in the evaluation of dental X-ray imaging systems.

Vandre RH, Pajak JC, Abdel-Nabi H, Farman TT, Farman AG.

Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2000 Jul;29(4):216-22.

PMID:
10918454
15.

Measurement accuracy and perceived quality of imaging systems for the evaluation of periodontal structures.

Baksi BG.

Odontology. 2008 Jul;96(1):55-60. doi: 10.1007/s10266-008-0081-4. Epub 2008 Jul 27.

PMID:
18661206
16.

Detectability of experimental peri-implant cancellous bone lesions using conventional and direct digital radiography.

Kavadella A, Karayiannis A, Nicopoulou-Karayianni K.

Aust Dent J. 2006 Jun;51(2):180-6.

17.

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 Nov-Dec;44(6):532-7.

PMID:
9515395
18.

Marginal bone levels measured in film and digital radiographs corrected for attenuation and visual response: an in vivo study.

Li G, Engström PE, Nasström K, Lü ZY, Sanderink G, Welander U.

Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2007 Jan;36(1):7-11.

PMID:
17329581
19.

Effect of different background lighting conditions on diagnostic performance of digital and film images.

Cederberg RA, Frederiksen NL, Benson BW, Shulman JD.

Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 1998 Sep;27(5):293-7.

PMID:
9879219
20.

Comparison of direct digital and conventional radiography for the detection of proximal surface caries in the mixed dentition.

Uprichard KK, Potter BJ, Russell CM, Schafer TE, Adair S, Weller RN.

Pediatr Dent. 2000 Jan-Feb;22(1):9-15.

PMID:
10730280

Supplemental Content

Support Center