コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)
通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 ing a 40x dry lens objective automated slide scanner.
2 mages were collected using the Siemens 3T MR scanner.
3 tients could sustain binocular fusion in the scanner.
4 nts with breast cancer on a clinical 3 T MRI scanner.
5 rebral hemispheres were scanned on a 3 T MRI scanner.
6 rformed on 1 of 2 different brands of PET/CT scanner.
7 myelin in white matter using a clinical 3-T scanner.
8 and a prototype photon-counting detector CT scanner.
9 tivation determined using a microarray laser scanner.
10 iod using a high-resolution small animal PET scanner.
11 atients were examined on a 3 T MR Philips(R) scanner.
12 xam with a 1.5 T clinical magnetic resonance scanner.
13 bles were imaged using a clinical ultrasound scanner.
14 ular imaging with an LED-based photoacoustic scanner.
15 d were imaged using 3.0 T Philips Achieva MR scanner.
16 steochondral samples on a clinical 3.0 T MRI scanner.
17 stases, who underwent WB-DWIBS on a 1.5-T MR scanner.
18 lf-paced naturalistic reading inside the MRI scanner.
19 uced them in a magneto-encephalography (MEG) scanner.
20 ain examinations were performed on a 1.5T MR scanner.
21 lti-shell diffusion MRI scan on a Siemens 3T scanner.
22 were imaged using UTE sequences on a 3T MRI scanner.
23 arization at a 1.5 T field of a clinical MRI scanner.
24 nts with breast cancer on a clinical 3 T MRI scanner.
25 n=40) who had been scanned with a different scanner.
26 nge 21-90 years, measured using the same MRI scanner.
27 N2, N3; control condition: N0) inside the MR scanner.
28 e scanned twice on an integrated PET and MRI scanner.
29 angiography performed with a whole-heart CT scanner.
30 were compared using a 3T magnetic resonance scanner.
31 rently available on the Siemens Biograph mMR scanner.
32 ia simulation prior to deployment in the MRI scanner.
33 emission tomography using a high-resolution scanner.
34 complexity of such investigation in the MRI scanner.
35 e: 1) were investigated with a hybrid PET/MR scanner.
36 ET imaging to avoid deadtime losses for this scanner.
37 time-of-flight-enabled simultaneous PET/MRI scanner.
38 imaging with a second-generation dual-source scanner.
39 ree precession (SSFP) sequences using a 3.0T scanner.
40 ey freely recalled all videos outside of the scanner.
41 e period and across time periods for a given scanner.
42 off-chip detection using conventional laser scanner.
43 SPGR sequence on a standard 3 T clinical MRI scanner.
44 ng a clinical PET/magnetic resonance imaging scanner.
45 sly been evaluated for a clinical whole-body scanner.
46 tural MRI data were acquired on a 3 Tesla MR scanner.
47 imization (OSEM) reconstructions on a PET/CT scanner.
48 poral dynamics of fMRI without using the MRI scanner.
49 the sensing area visually or using a flatbed scanner.
50 ed activity limits were established for each scanner.
51 patial or motor cues while lying in the fMRI scanner.
52 o underwent MRI examination with a 1.5 Tesla scanner.
53 o) receptor using a PerkinElmer G4 PET-X-Ray scanner.
54 ging (MRI) data were acquired on the same 3T scanner.
55 atal ICU-sited 1.5-T magnetic resonance (MR) scanner.
56 ls of pulmonary hypertension on a Bruker 7 T scanner.
57 visuospatial working memory task outside the scanner.
58 elin images specifically with a clinical 3-T scanner.
59 the phantom was scanned 4 times on the same scanner.
60 heating on a trial-by-trial basis in the MRI scanner.
61 were obtained using a PET insert on a 7-T MR scanner.
62 ng dynamic (13)C data on a preclinical 3T MR scanner.
63 ing high-resolution and high-sensitivity PET scanners.
64 ionizing radiation dose with new generation scanners.
65 dual-layer detector systems in six different scanners.
66 oblem for brain studies in hybrid TOF PET/MR scanners.
67 lips and three 3-T (Philips, Siemens and GE) scanners.
68 r mean T1 and 8.0% for mean T2 values across scanners.
69 3 of 6 cold rods were discernable by only 5 scanners.
70 currently acquired for AC in some commercial scanners.
71 n methods and increasing use of 3 T clinical scanners.
72 (AC) is still challenging in combined PET/MR scanners.
73 e 4 institutions relying on different PET/CT scanners.
74 efficacy assessments with integrated PET/MRI scanners.
75 allowing for accurate AC in combined PET/MR scanners.
76 ven PBTC sites scanned the phantom on 13 PET scanners.
77 our institutions relying on different PET/CT scanners.
78 promise to map reactive microglia using MRI scanners.
79 staining and cutting protocols and different scanners.
80 attenuation correction in integrated PET/MR scanners.
81 uality control tests were performed for both scanners.
82 asis of patient size for each of a site's CT scanners.
83 th as provided by fast field cycling imaging scanners.
84 d with inexpensive transilluminating flatbed scanners.
85 , long shelf life, and the prevalence of MRI scanners.
86 ,212 whole slide images digitalized by three scanners.
87 018 and July 2019 from six single-vendor MRI scanners.
88 d reproducibility across populations and MRI scanners.
90 x different magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners (10 patients per scanner) using five freely ava
91 aphy (EEG) application, the Smartphone Brain Scanner-2 (SBS2), to detect epileptiform abnormalities c
92 ith a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanner, a clinical energy-integrating detector CT scann
94 w in the distal femoral condyle at a 3 T MRI scanner, a study was performed with eight healthy volunt
95 SPI was then adapted to a clinical 1.5 T scanner, added to patients' staging protocol, and compar
96 versified cohort spanning different studies, scanners, ages and geographic locations around the world
98 Fully digital, high-resolution clinical PET scanners allow for investigating small brain stem nuclei
99 the coherence of utterances produced in the scanner, allowing identification of the neural correlate
100 tion was within 10% of unity on only 5 of 13 scanners, although 12 of 13 were subjectively judged to
103 d T2 mapping were performed with a 1.5-T MRI scanner and compared with a fast free-breathing acquisit
104 oth position was obtained using an intraoral scanner and files were compared in metrology software.
105 sponse can be obtained using a smartphone or scanner and free imaging software within a wide linear r
106 ion using dual-energy CT systems varied with scanner and phantom size, but all systems depicted iodin
107 sed input and output processes: analogues of scanner and printer interfaces that feed information to
108 compare standard cMRI sequences from an HFO scanner and those from a cylindrical, 1.5T MR system.
109 constructions (2 x 2 x 2 mm voxels) for both scanners and determined SUV(max), SUV(mean), lesion-to-b
110 he CHAMPS sites, with the use of whole slide scanners and digital image archives, for maximizing conc
111 d Technology-traceable reference sources for scanners and dose calibrators, and similar patient and i
113 The use of different diagnostic criteria, scanners and imaging sequences may, however, obscure fur
114 To have a precise comparison between CT scanners and related doses and image quality parameters,
115 he input datasets (MRI data as stored by the scanner) and the outputs (data ready for modeling and an
116 r, a clinical energy-integrating detector CT scanner, and a prototype photon-counting detector CT sca
117 from a 3.0-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging scanner, and assessed anxiety [Beck Anxiety Inventory],
119 ials and Methods Three CT scanners, four MRI scanners, and cooling systems were equipped with kilowat
121 exemplars from multiple different sites, and scanners, and then independently validating on almost 20
122 cose and standard magnetic resonance imaging scanners, and with a single acquisition provides steady-
123 ng alteplase at the computed tomography (CT) scanner; and (3) registering the patient as unknown to a
124 s routinely used across multiple centers and scanners; and (2) proposes acquisition and reconstructio
129 activation and a battery of objective out-of-scanner assessments that index lower and higher-level so
132 I examinations performed with 1.5- and 3.0-T scanners at one institution between July 2012 and Octobe
133 fully open source and low-cost hyperspectral scanner based on a commercial spectrometer coupled to cu
136 Two readers used lumen boundary to determine scanner blur and then optimized component densities and
139 h a custom-designed handheld volumetric MSOT scanner capable of high-spatial-resolution (approximatel
140 ody FFC Magnetic Resonance Imaging (FFC-MRI) scanner capable of performing accurate measurements non-
148 ces at 26 Berkeley stores; (2) point-of-sale scanner data on 15.5 million checkouts for beverage pric
154 develop a first-generation total-body PET/CT scanner, discuss selected application areas for total-bo
156 m contralateral side) were examined on a 3 T scanner (Elition, Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherla
157 an automated inline implementation on the MR scanner, enabling one-click analysis and reporting in a
160 -end x-ray tubes with high-end multislice CT scanners equipped with iterative reconstruction, metal a
165 e design and testing of a portable prototype scanner for brain MRI that uses a compact and lightweigh
168 d through manufacturing a first-of-kind muCT scanner for X-ray histology and developing optimized ima
171 the best performance, both within and across scanners, for kNN-TTP, followed by LST-LPA and LST-LGA,
174 d between July 2017 and January 2018 with 10 scanners from a single manufacturer, including different
179 troduction of simultaneous whole-body PET/MR scanners has enabled new research taking advantage of th
180 erformed on two 128 multi-detector (MDCT) CT scanners: - iCT (Philips Healthcare with iDose(4)); - De
181 resonance imaging data were obtained on a 3T scanner in 138 sleeping nonsedated neonates: 55 full-ter
183 the energy consumption of modern CT and MRI scanners in a university hospital radiology department a
186 Five different commercial preclinical PET/CT scanners in Europe and the United States were enrolled.
187 nal MRI scans were collected on a 3T Siemens scanner, in addition to participants' cognitive and psyc
188 ts engaged in an incentive delay task in the scanner, in which they received erotic or monetary rewar
189 conducted independently on two Discovery MI scanners installed at Stanford University and Uppsala Un
191 vent of ultra-high field (7T and higher) MRI scanners, it has become possible to perform sub-millimet
192 ocess with rapid multiband brain imaging, in-scanner kinematics and Bayesian pattern component modell
196 ility of using the primate mini-EXPLORER PET scanner, making use of its high sensitivity and 45-cm ax
200 to assess tooth mobility based on intraoral scanner measurements provided reliable data in an in vit
201 5% confidence interval, 3%-10%) for the same scanner model or institution and 6% (95% confidence inte
203 were scanned twice within 15 d, on the same scanner (n = 10); different but same model scanners with
204 nance images acquired from seven independent scanners (n = 1,100), FSA distinguished individuals with
206 ame institution, using the same scanner or 2 scanners of the same model, had an average difference in
207 roduction of open, high-field, 1.0T (HFO) MR scanners offers advantages for examinations of obese, cl
209 within the same institution, using the same scanner or 2 scanners of the same model, had an average
211 ed to decide on the applicability of a given scanner or transducer for a particular kind of examinati
213 wever, radiomics features are affected by CT scanner parameters such as reconstruction kernel or sect
214 an invasive coronary angiogram, improved CT scanner parameters, and predominantly conservative manag
222 ; more resolution-dependent harmonization of scanner protocols and reconstruction algorithms may be c
223 sed for evaluating biases on default/general scanner protocols, followed by developing standardized p
227 ity of inexpensive imaging technology (e.g., scanners, Raspberry Pi, smartphones and other sub-$50 di
228 One hurdle is the use of covert (silent) in-scanner recall to study autobiographical memory, which p
230 ded IR images of the subject's breasts, a 3D scanner recorded surface geometries, and standard diagno
231 following: uniformity was substandard in one scanner, recovery coefficients (RCs) were either over- o
234 relaxation times and their variation across scanners (reproducibility) as well as across repetitions
241 the aspirational goals for future-generation scanners, some of the factors that have contributed to t
243 terms of imaging speeds, however, mechanical scanners still limit the acquisition rates to typically
245 sing a novel cadmium-zinc-telluride SPECT/CT scanner, SUV(max), SUV(mean), CAA, and %ID measured by a
246 cted using a 7-Tesla magnetic field strength scanner, taking into account the specificity of both set
248 ss in translational research and advances in scanner technology have resulted in rapid integration of
252 Participants completed two ToM tasks in the scanner, the False Belief and Person Description tasks.
254 study on two generations of Biograph PET/CT scanners, the mCT Flow and the Vision, to study the impa
255 pidly digitize whole slide images with slide scanners, there has been interest in developing computer
256 we use is demonstrated by the ability of LT-scanner to identify the known targets of FDA-approved ki
257 We applied a combined functional MRI-PET scanner to simultaneously probe mothers' dopamine respon
258 scan readily available on most clinical MRI scanners, to assess response to therapy and guide clinic
259 cessing unit-based model inference on the MR scanner took less than 1 second for a typical perfusion
261 e in vivo study were performed with a PET/CT scanner under three conditions: (a) no MRI surface coil
262 ing (fMRI) scans were acquired with a 3T MRI scanner using a blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) prot
263 The women were scanned with a 1.5 T Philips scanner using a breath-hold multiecho gradient echo sequ
264 efficacy studies were performed on a 1 T MRI scanner using a transgenic APP/PSEN1 mouse model of Alzh
266 The limit of detection of the model and scanner using serially diluted stool was 5-fold more sen
268 ance imaging (MRI) scanners (10 patients per scanner) using five freely available and fully-automated
271 A dedicated programmable sample flow rate scanner was used to infuse protein samples at different
272 rmance of each method both within and across scanners was assessed using spatial and volumetric corre
274 , collected within an ultra-high-field (7 T) scanner, we found that the extent of vertical asymmetry
276 .0 and 5.0 (4.0 is truth); however, 11 of 13 scanners were subjectively judged to have very good or e
278 to March 2019), three different clinical US scanners were used to benchmark QBF in a calibrated flow
279 tudies conducted using a Discovery 950 GE 7T scanner, were carried out with PRESS sequence, and a VOI
281 I allowed by the FDA for clinical ultrasound scanners, whereas 10 and 15% emulsion vaporized at 1.87
282 our of 6 hot rods were discernable by all 13 scanners, whereas 3 of 6 cold rods were discernable by o
285 ation exposure of a computed tomography (CT) scanner with 16-cm coverage and 230-microm spatial resol
286 was acquired using a Siemens 3 Tesla Prisma scanner with 80 mT/m gradients and a 32-channel head coi
287 e MDSA can be performed in an open 1.0-T MRI scanner with a high level of technical success and a rea
291 andardized PET protocols were the following: scanner with substandard uniformity improved by 36%, RC
292 onance-positron emission tomography (MR-PET) scanner with the second-generation TSPO radiotracer [(11
293 whole-body (18)F-FDG imaging using a PET/MRI scanner with time-of-flight capability for low-dose clin
296 DCE-MRI, dynamic PET, and DWI using a PET-MR scanner within one week prior to their planned surgery.
297 Quantitative results were compared across scanners within a given time period and across time peri
298 e scanner (n = 10); different but same model scanners within an institution (n = 2); or different mod