This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

By M. W. Barnard, M.D.; J. B. Amberson, Jr., M.D., and M. F. Loew, M.D., American Review of Tuberculosis 25:752 (June) 1932. By M. W. Barnard, M.D., Quarterly Bulletin, The Milbank Memorial Fund 10: (April) 1932. By J. B. Amberson, Jr., M.D.; M. W. Barnard, M.D., and M. F. Loew, M.D., Transactions of Twenty-Eighth Annual Meeting of the National Tuberculosis Association, 1932.

Arch Intern Med. 1933;52(4):647.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

A review of the investigative work of Amberson, Barnard and Loew on the comparative value of paper and of celluloid films for roentgenograms of the chest leads one to the following conclusions.

The present financial condition has made economic demands, and necessarily workers using the x-rays have been trying to find a suitable substitute for the rather expensive celluloid x-ray film.

The substitute must be of low cost but still compare favorably with the more expensive accepted celluloid film.

The use of a single coated paper is not new; from time to time manufacturers have sold x-ray paper, but the quality has not been satisfactory except for the examination of small parts. Recently manufacturers have brought out an improved paper, and at present many of the large hospitals and clinics are using this paper, especially for follow-up examinations.

The present paper compares quite favorably with the celluloid film, even in . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?