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 *

226 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15089938)

  • 1. A novel approach to evaluating the reproducibility of a replication technique for the manufacture of electroconductive replicas for use in quantitative clinical dental wear studies.
    Chadwick RG; Mitchell HL; Ward S
    J Oral Rehabil; 2004 Apr; 31(4):335-9. PubMed ID: 15089938
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of the accuracy and reproducibility of a replication technique for the manufacture of electroconductive replicas for use in quantitative clinical dental wear studies.
    Chadwick RG; Mitchell HL; Ward S
    J Oral Rehabil; 2002 Jun; 29(6):540-5. PubMed ID: 12071922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Assessing the tooth-restoration interface wear resistance of two cementation techniques: effect of a surface sealant.
    Prakki A; Ribeiro IW; Cilli R; Mondelli RF
    Oper Dent; 2005; 30(6):739-46. PubMed ID: 16382597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: an in vitro study.
    Lee H; Ercoli C; Funkenbusch PD; Feng C
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):107-13. PubMed ID: 18262011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study.
    Caputi S; Varvara G
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Apr; 99(4):274-81. PubMed ID: 18395537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Randomized controlled clinical study on the accuracy of two-stage putty-and-wash impression materials.
    Haim M; Luthardt RG; Rudolph H; Koch R; Walter MH; Quaas S
    Int J Prosthodont; 2009; 22(3):296-302. PubMed ID: 19548415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: virtual three-dimensional analysis of exactness.
    Persson AS; Odén A; Andersson M; Sandborgh-Englund G
    Dent Mater; 2009 Jul; 25(7):929-36. PubMed ID: 19264353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. In vitro evaluation of push-out bond strength of direct ceramic inlays to tooth surface with fiber-reinforced composite at the interface.
    Cekic I; Ergun G; Uctasli S; Lassila LV
    J Prosthet Dent; 2007 May; 97(5):271-8. PubMed ID: 17547945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of strength and adhesion of composite resin versus ceramic inlays in molars.
    Dejak B; Mlotkowski A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2008 Feb; 99(2):131-40. PubMed ID: 18262014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Development of a novel system for assessing tooth and restoration wear.
    Chadwick RG; Mitchell HL; Cameron I; Hunter B; Tulley M
    J Dent; 1997 Jan; 25(1):41-7. PubMed ID: 9080739
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The use of a 3D laser scanner using superimpositional software to assess the accuracy of impression techniques.
    Shah S; Sundaram G; Bartlett D; Sherriff M
    J Dent; 2004 Nov; 32(8):653-8. PubMed ID: 15476960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Accuracy of impressions and casts using different implant impression techniques in a multi-implant system with an internal hex connection.
    Wenz HJ; Hertrampf K
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(1):39-47. PubMed ID: 18416411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effect of adding a stone base on the accuracy of working casts using different types of dental stone.
    Al-Abidi K; Ellakwa A
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2006 Sep; 7(4):17-28. PubMed ID: 16957787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. In vivo and in vitro evaluation of marginal fit of class II ceromer inlays.
    Gemalmaz D; Kükrer D
    J Oral Rehabil; 2006 Jun; 33(6):436-42. PubMed ID: 16671990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic inlays.
    Hannig C; Westphal C; Becker K; Attin T
    J Prosthet Dent; 2005 Oct; 94(4):342-9. PubMed ID: 16198171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Conduct of an algorithm in quantifying simulated palatal surface tooth erosion.
    Chadwick RG; Mitchell HL
    J Oral Rehabil; 2001 May; 28(5):450-6. PubMed ID: 11380785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Implant cast accuracy as a function of impression techniques and impression material viscosity.
    Walker MP; Ries D; Borello B
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2008; 23(4):669-74. PubMed ID: 18807563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fracture resistance and microtensile bond strength of maxillary premolars restored with two resin composite inlay systems.
    Sun YS; Chen YM; Smales RJ; Yip KH
    Am J Dent; 2008 Apr; 21(2):97-100. PubMed ID: 18578176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A method to determine the loss of substance of dental restorations.
    Vrijhoef MM; Letzel H; Hendriks FH
    J Oral Rehabil; 1985 Jan; 12(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 3857314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effects of custom tray material on the accuracy of master casts.
    Shafa S; Zaree Z; Mosharraf R
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2008 Sep; 9(6):49-56. PubMed ID: 18784859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.