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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10220978)

  • 1. Evaluation of the predictive impact of cephalometric variables. Logistic regression and ROC curves.
    Lux CJ; Conradt C; Stellzig A; Komposch G
    J Orofac Orthop; 1999; 60(2):95-107. PubMed ID: 10220978
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Diagnostic model of anterior open bite--a new way to predict skeletal type: a cross-sectional study.
    Urzal V; Braga AC; Ferreira AP
    Int Orthod; 2014 Sep; 12(3):358-70. PubMed ID: 25087172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cephalometric variables to predict future success of early orthopedic Class III treatment.
    Ghiz MA; Ngan P; Gunel E
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Mar; 127(3):301-6. PubMed ID: 15775944
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation: assessment of the Skieller, Björk, and Linde-Hansen method.
    Leslie LR; Southard TE; Southard KA; Casko JS; Jakobsen JR; Tolley EA; Hillis SL; Carolan C; Logue M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1998 Dec; 114(6):659-67. PubMed ID: 9844205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Quantitative description of the shape of the mandible.
    Halazonetis DJ; Shapiro E; Gheewalla RK; Clark RE
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1991 Jan; 99(1):49-56. PubMed ID: 1986526
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A study of the growth changes in the maxillofacial skeleton of females with reversed occlusion: investigation by means of lateral x-ray cephalogram.
    Yamaguchi H; Naruse T; Lin MH; Nakakawaji K; Katada H; Isshiki Y
    Bull Tokyo Dent Coll; 1997 Nov; 38(4):283-9. PubMed ID: 9566141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Preliminary study of cranio-maxillofacial hard tissue structure feature of young mandibular retrusion orthognathic patients with delaire cephalometric analysis].
    Zhou J; Song JL; Chen MW; Wang T; Deng F
    Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2009 Dec; 27(6):633-6, 641. PubMed ID: 20077899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cephalometric variables predicting the long-term success or failure of combined rapid maxillary expansion and facial mask therapy.
    Baccetti T; Franchi L; McNamara JA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2004 Jul; 126(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 15224054
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Development and testing of multilevel models for longitudinal craniofacial growth prediction.
    Chvatal BA; Behrents RG; Ceen RF; Buschang PH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Jul; 128(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 16027625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Opening rotations of the mandible during and after treatment.
    Ryan MJ; Schneider BJ; BeGole EA; Muhl ZF
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1998 Aug; 114(2):142-9. PubMed ID: 9714278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Development of the craniofacial structures and mandibular growth rotation: a longitudinal study with Enlow analysis (counterpart analysis)].
    Işeri H
    Turk Ortodonti Derg; 1989 Apr; 2(1):64-72. PubMed ID: 2489147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Determination of Class II and Class III skeletal patterns: receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis on various cephalometric measurements.
    Han UK; Kim YH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1998 May; 113(5):538-45. PubMed ID: 9598612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Cephalometrics of anterior open bite: a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
    Wardlaw DW; Smith RJ; Hertweck DW; Hildebolt CF
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1992 Mar; 101(3):234-43. PubMed ID: 1539550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of Ricketts' long-range growth prediction in Turkish children.
    Kocadereli I; Telli AE
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 May; 115(5):515-20. PubMed ID: 10229883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Relationship between vertical skeletal pattern and success rate of orthodontic mini-implants.
    Moon CH; Park HK; Nam JS; Im JS; Baek SH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Jul; 138(1):51-7. PubMed ID: 20620833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cephalometric variables used to predict the success of interceptive treatment with rapid maxillary expansion and face mask. A longitudinal study.
    Nardoni DN; Siqueira DF; Cardoso Mde A; Capelozza Filho L
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2015; 20(1):85-96. PubMed ID: 25741830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Visualization of individual growth-related craniofacial changes based on cephalometric landmark data: a pilot study.
    Lux CJ; Starke J; Rübel J; Stellzig A; Komposch G
    Cleft Palate Craniofac J; 2002 May; 39(3):341-52. PubMed ID: 12019012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Soft tissue and dentoskeletal profile changes associated with maxillary expansion and protraction headgear treatment.
    Ngan P; Hägg U; Yiu C; Merwin D; Wei SH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1996 Jan; 109(1):38-49. PubMed ID: 8540481
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation evaluated from a longitudinal implant sample.
    Skieller V; Björk A; Linde-Hansen T
    Am J Orthod; 1984 Nov; 86(5):359-70. PubMed ID: 6594058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Control of the vertical dimension in Class II correction using a cervical headgear and lower utility arch in growing patients. Part I.
    Cook AH; Sellke TA; BeGole EA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1994 Oct; 106(4):376-88. PubMed ID: 7942653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.