In vitro comparison of plain radiography, double-contrast cystography, ultrasonography, and computed tomography for estimation of cystolith size.

MLA

Byl, Kevin M., et al. “In Vitro Comparison of Plain Radiography, Double-Contrast Cystography, Ultrasonography, and Computed Tomography for Estimation of Cystolith Size.” American Journal of Veterinary Research, vol. 71, no. 3, Mar. 2010, pp. 374–80. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.71.3.374.

APA

Byl, K. M., Kruger, J. M., Kinns, J., Nelson, N. C., Hauptman, J. G., & Johnson, C. A. (2010). In vitro comparison of plain radiography, double-contrast cystography, ultrasonography, and computed tomography for estimation of cystolith size. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 71(3), 374–380. https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.71.3.374

Chicago

Byl, Kevin M, John M Kruger, Jennifer Kinns, Nathan C Nelson, Joe G Hauptman, and Cheri A Johnson. 2010. “In Vitro Comparison of Plain Radiography, Double-Contrast Cystography, Ultrasonography, and Computed Tomography for Estimation of Cystolith Size.” American Journal of Veterinary Research 71 (3): 374–80. doi:10.2460/ajvr.71.3.374.