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 *

108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11896848)

  • 21. Decisions of practitioners regarding placement of amalgam and composite restorations in general practice settings.
    Pink FE; Minden NJ; Simmonds S
    Oper Dent; 1994; 19(4):127-32. PubMed ID: 9028231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation and treatment of failed amalgam restorations at Ibadan, Nigeria.
    Ajayi DM; Abiodun-Solanke IM; Arigbede AO
    West Afr J Med; 2013; 32(4):248-53. PubMed ID: 24488277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Class II amalgam restorations, glass-ionomer tunnel restorations, and caries development on adjacent tooth surfaces: a 3-year clinical study.
    Svanberg M
    Caries Res; 1992; 26(4):315-8. PubMed ID: 1423449
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Restoration longevity and analysis of reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations provided by vocational dental practitioners and their trainers in the United Kingdom.
    Burke FJ; Cheung SW; Mjör IA; Wilson NH
    Quintessence Int; 1999 Apr; 30(4):234-42. PubMed ID: 10635250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Extent of tooth decay in the mouth and increased need for replacement of dental restorations: the New England Children's Amalgam Trial.
    Trachtenberg F; Maserejian NN; Tavares M; Soncini JA; Hayes C
    Pediatr Dent; 2008; 30(5):388-92. PubMed ID: 18942597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Long-term evaluation and rerestoration of amalgam restorations.
    Akerboom HB; Advokaat JG; Van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ
    Community Dent Oral Epidemiol; 1993 Feb; 21(1):45-8. PubMed ID: 8432106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Placement and replacement of restorations by selected practitioners.
    Tyas MJ
    Aust Dent J; 2005 Jun; 50(2):81-9; quiz 127. PubMed ID: 16050086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Placement and replacement rates of amalgam and composite restorations on posterior teeth in a military population.
    Owen BD; Guevara PH; Greenwood W
    US Army Med Dep J; 2017; (2-17):88-94. PubMed ID: 28853125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Placement and replacement of restorations in general dental practice in Iceland.
    Mjör IA; Shen C; Eliasson ST; Richter S
    Oper Dent; 2002; 27(2):117-23. PubMed ID: 11931133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. An evaluation of replacement rates for posterior resin-based composite and amalgam restorations in U.S. Navy and marine corps recruits.
    Simecek JW; Diefenderfer KE; Cohen ME
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2009 Feb; 140(2):200-9; quiz 249. PubMed ID: 19188417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. 12-year survival of composite vs. amalgam restorations.
    Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Loomans BA; Huysmans MC
    J Dent Res; 2010 Oct; 89(10):1063-7. PubMed ID: 20660797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Clinical performance of a compomer and amalgam for the interproximal restoration of primary molars: a 24-month evaluation.
    Duggal MS; Toumba KJ; Sharma NK
    Br Dent J; 2002 Sep; 193(6):339-42. PubMed ID: 12368893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Examiner agreement in the replacement decision of Class I amalgam restorations.
    Ermis RB; Aydin U
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2004 May; 5(2):81-92. PubMed ID: 15150636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. A 3-year clinical study of tunnel restorations.
    Strand GV; Nordbø H; Tveit AB; Espelid I; Wikstrand K; Eide GE
    Eur J Oral Sci; 1996 Aug; 104(4 ( Pt 1)):384-9. PubMed ID: 8930587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Replacement reasons and service time of class-II amalgam restorations in relation to cavity design.
    Jokstad A; Mjör IA
    Acta Odontol Scand; 1991 Apr; 49(2):109-26. PubMed ID: 2053429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Early failure of Class II resin composite versus Class II amalgam restorations placed by dental students.
    Overton JD; Sullivan DJ
    J Dent Educ; 2012 Mar; 76(3):338-40. PubMed ID: 22383602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Alternative treatments to replacement of defective amalgam restorations: results of a seven-year clinical study.
    Gordan VV; Riley JL; Blaser PK; Mondragon E; Garvan CW; Mjör IA
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2011 Jul; 142(7):842-9. PubMed ID: 21719808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Anaerobic microflora under Class I and Class II composite and amalgam restorations.
    Splieth C; Bernhardt O; Heinrich A; Bernhardt H; Meyer G
    Quintessence Int; 2003; 34(7):497-503. PubMed ID: 12946067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effect of finishing and polishing on the decision to replace existing amalgam restorations.
    Cardoso M; Baratieri LN; Ritter AV
    Quintessence Int; 1999 Jun; 30(6):413-8. PubMed ID: 10635277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Composite resin restorations: a cross-sectional survey of placement and replacement in Jordan.
    Al-Negrish AR
    Int Dent J; 2002 Dec; 52(6):461-8. PubMed ID: 12553402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.