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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11997764)

  • 1. Orthodontic treatment outcome in a First Nations population in Alberta, Canada: a comparative study.
    Cadman KC; Glover KE; Heo G; Warren S; Major PW
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2002 Apr; 121(4):396-402. PubMed ID: 11997764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of treatment and post-treatment changes by the PAR Index.
    Birkeland K; Furevik J; Bøe OE; Wisth PJ
    Eur J Orthod; 1997 Jun; 19(3):279-88. PubMed ID: 9239958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. [Efficacy of orthodontic treatment according to the Peer Assessment Rating index].
    Piskorski D
    Ann Acad Med Stetin; 2003; 49():335-51. PubMed ID: 15552857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of treatment result and compliance between private practice Medicaid and non-Medicaid orthodontic patients--a brief communication.
    Dickens S; Beane RA; Caplan DJ; Vann W
    J Public Health Dent; 2008; 68(3):167-9. PubMed ID: 18179467
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Orthodontic treatment--improvement and standards using the peer assessment rating index.
    Onyeaso CO; Begole EA
    Angle Orthod; 2006 Mar; 76(2):260-4. PubMed ID: 16539550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The effectiveness of phase I orthodontic treatment in a Medicaid population.
    Mirabelli JT; Huang GJ; Siu CH; King GJ; Omnell L
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 May; 127(5):592-8. PubMed ID: 15877040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Orthodontic outcomes assessment using the peer assessment rating index.
    Dyken RA; Sadowsky PL; Hurst D
    Angle Orthod; 2001 Jun; 71(3):164-9. PubMed ID: 11407767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The long-term benefits of orthodontic treatment.
    Linklater RA; Fox NA
    Br Dent J; 2002 May; 192(10):583-7. PubMed ID: 12075958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Malocclusion severity in Asian men in relation to malocclusion type and orthodontic treatment need.
    Soh J; Sandham A; Chan YH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Nov; 128(5):648-52. PubMed ID: 16286213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluation of Invisalign treatment effectiveness and efficiency compared with conventional fixed appliances using the Peer Assessment Rating index.
    Gu J; Tang JS; Skulski B; Fields HW; Beck FM; Firestone AR; Kim DG; Deguchi T
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Feb; 151(2):259-266. PubMed ID: 28153154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Influence of the quality of the finished occlusion on postretention occlusal relapse.
    de Freitas KM; Janson G; de Freitas MR; Pinzan A; Henriques JF; Pinzan-Vercelino CR
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):428.e9-14. PubMed ID: 17920494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effectiveness and duration of two-arch fixed appliance treatment.
    Chew MT; Sandham A
    Aust Orthod J; 2000 Jul; 16(2):98-103. PubMed ID: 11201970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. An assessment of extraction versus nonextraction orthodontic treatment using the peer assessment rating (PAR) index.
    Holman JK; Hans MG; Nelson S; Powers MP
    Angle Orthod; 1998 Dec; 68(6):527-34. PubMed ID: 9851350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Occlusal outcome of orthodontic treatment.
    al Yami EA; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM; van 't Hof MA
    Angle Orthod; 1998 Oct; 68(5):439-44. PubMed ID: 9770102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Treatment results in dental school orthodontic patients in 1983 and 1993.
    Firestone AR; Häsler RU; Ingervall B
    Angle Orthod; 1999 Feb; 69(1):19-26. PubMed ID: 10022180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Early treatment outcome assessed by the Peer Assessment Rating index.
    Pangrazio-Kulbersh V; Kaczynski R; Shunock M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 May; 115(5):544-50. PubMed ID: 10229887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effectiveness and duration of orthodontic treatment in adults and adolescents.
    Robb SI; Sadowsky C; Schneider BJ; BeGole EA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1998 Oct; 114(4):383-6. PubMed ID: 9790321
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Treatment and standard evaluation using the Peer Assessment Rating Index.
    Willems G; Heidbüchel R; Verdonck A; Carels C
    Clin Oral Investig; 2001 Mar; 5(1):57-62. PubMed ID: 11355100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effectiveness of Class II, division 1 treatment.
    O'Brien KD; Robbins R; Vig KW; Vig PS; Shnorhokian H; Weyant R
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1995 Mar; 107(3):329-34. PubMed ID: 7879767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of the index of complexity outcome and need (ICON) with the peer assessment rating (PAR) and the index of orthodontic treatment need (IOTN).
    Fox NA; Daniels C; Gilgrass T
    Br Dent J; 2002 Aug; 193(4):225-30. PubMed ID: 12222910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.