301 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15736893)
1. Reproducibility of clinical attachment level and probing depth of a manual probe and a computerized electronic probe.
Alves Rde V; Machion L; Andia DC; Casati MZ; Sallum AW; Sallum EA
J Int Acad Periodontol; 2005 Jan; 7(1):27-30. PubMed ID: 15736893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Clinical attachment level measurements with and without the use of a stent by a computerized electronic probe.
Machion L; Andia DC; Nociti Júnior FH; Casati MZ; Sallum AW; Sallum EA
J Int Acad Periodontol; 2007 Apr; 9(2):58-62. PubMed ID: 17506385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of two pressure-sensitive periodontal probes and a manual periodontal probe in shallow and deep pockets.
Rams TE; Slots J
Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent; 1993 Dec; 13(6):520-9. PubMed ID: 8181912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of two automated periodontal probes and two probes with a conventional readout in periodontal maintenance patients.
Barendregt DS; Van der Velden U; Timmerman MF; van der Weijden GA
J Clin Periodontol; 2006 Apr; 33(4):276-82. PubMed ID: 16553636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Reproducibility of periodontal probing using a conventional manual and an automated force-controlled electronic probe.
Wang SF; Leknes KN; Zimmerman GJ; Sigurdsson TJ; Wikesjö UM; Selvig KA
J Periodontol; 1995 Jan; 66(1):38-46. PubMed ID: 7891248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Sources of error for periodontal probing measurements.
Grossi SG; Dunford RG; Ho A; Koch G; Machtei EE; Genco RJ
J Periodontal Res; 1996 Jul; 31(5):330-6. PubMed ID: 8858537
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Accuracy and reproducibility of two manual periodontal probes. An in vitro study.
Buduneli E; Aksoy O; Köse T; Atilla G
J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Oct; 31(10):815-9. PubMed ID: 15367182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparison of a conventional probe with electronic and manual pressure-regulated probes.
Perry DA; Taggart EJ; Leung A; Newburn E
J Periodontol; 1994 Oct; 65(10):908-13. PubMed ID: 7823271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Clinical evaluation of electronic and manual constant force probes.
Khocht A; Chang KM
J Periodontol; 1998 Jan; 69(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 9527557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical evaluation of a constant force electronic probe.
Quirynen M; Callens A; van Steenberghe D; Nys M
J Periodontol; 1993 Jan; 64(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 8426288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reproducibility of probing depth measurement by an experimental periodontal probe incorporating optical fiber sensor.
Ishihata K; Wakabayashi N; Wadachi J; Akizuki T; Izumi Y; Takakuda K; Igarashi Y
J Periodontol; 2012 Feb; 83(2):222-7. PubMed ID: 21574830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of a new furcation stent as a fixed reference point for class II furcation measurements.
Laxman VK; Khatri M; Devaraj CG; Reddy K; Reddy R
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2009 Mar; 10(2):18-25. PubMed ID: 19279968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Detection of the cemento-enamel junction with three different probes: an "in vitro" model.
Barendregt DS; van der Velden U; Timmerman MF; Bulthuis HM; van der Weijden F
J Clin Periodontol; 2009 Mar; 36(3):212-8. PubMed ID: 19196382
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Reproducibility and validity of the assessment of clinical furcation parameters as related to different probes.
Eickholz P; Kim TS
J Periodontol; 1998 Mar; 69(3):328-36. PubMed ID: 9579619
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Reproducibility of attachment level recordings using an electronic and a conventional probe.
Villata L; Baelum V
J Periodontol; 1996 Dec; 67(12):1292-300. PubMed ID: 8997676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Option-4 algorithm for automated disc probe: reduction in the variance of site-specific relative attachment level measurements.
Breen HJ; Rogers PA; Slaney RE; Lawless HC; Austin JS; Gillett IR; Johnson NW
J Periodontol; 1997 May; 68(5):456-66. PubMed ID: 9182741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The influence of gingival health status on periodontal probing measurements. A clinical study in humans.
Molina GO; Souza SL; Grisi MF; Novaes AB; Taba M
J Int Acad Periodontol; 2004 Apr; 6(2):56-62. PubMed ID: 15125016
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A comparison between measurements made with a conventional periodontal pocket probe, an electronic pressure probe and measurements made at surgery.
Galgut PN; Waite IM
Int Dent J; 1990 Dec; 40(6):333-8. PubMed ID: 2276830
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Intra - and inter-examiner reproducibility in constant force probing.
Wang SF; Leknes KN; Zimmerman GJ; Sigurdsson TJ; Wikesjö UM; Selvig KA
J Clin Periodontol; 1995 Dec; 22(12):918-22. PubMed ID: 8613559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An assessment of the validity of a constant force electronic probe in measuring probing depths.
Hull PS; Clerehugh V; Ghassemi-Aval A
J Periodontol; 1995 Oct; 66(10):848-51. PubMed ID: 8537866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
