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 *

206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16539543)

  • 21. Nasal Morphology and Its Correlation to Craniofacial Morphology in Lateral Cephalometric Analysis.
    Jankowska A; Janiszewska-Olszowska J; Grocholewicz K
    Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2021 Mar; 18(6):. PubMed ID: 33809695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Association between Björk's structural signs of mandibular growth rotation and skeletofacial morphology.
    von Bremen J; Pancherz H
    Angle Orthod; 2005 Jul; 75(4):506-9. PubMed ID: 16097217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Esthetic preferences of orthodontists, dentists, and plastic surgeons for balanced facial profiles.
    Milutinovic J; Aleksic E; Avramov S; Kalevski K; Gajic M; Pejanovic D; Milic J
    J Oral Sci; 2023 Mar; 65(2):73-76. PubMed ID: 36823034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Facial aesthetics and the divine proportion: a comparison of surgical and non-surgical class II treatment.
    Shell TL; Woods MG
    Aust Orthod J; 2004 Nov; 20(2):51-63. PubMed ID: 16429875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A Quantitative Approach to Determining the Ideal Female Lip Aesthetic and Its Effect on Facial Attractiveness.
    Popenko NA; Tripathi PB; Devcic Z; Karimi K; Osann K; Wong BJF
    JAMA Facial Plast Surg; 2017 Jul; 19(4):261-267. PubMed ID: 28208179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The influence of natural head position on the assessment of facial morphology.
    Woźniak K; Piątkowska D; Lipski M
    Adv Clin Exp Med; 2012; 21(6):743-9. PubMed ID: 23457132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A comparison of providers' and consumers' perceptions of facial-profile attractiveness.
    Maple JR; Vig KW; Beck FM; Larsen PE; Shanker S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Dec; 128(6):690-6; quiz 801. PubMed ID: 16360907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The Esthetic Difference of Chinese Beauty Evaluated by Two Different Human Races Based on Three-Dimensional Average Face Analysis.
    Chen C; Chen Y; Li Q; Kau CH
    J Craniofac Surg; 2019 Jul; 30(5):1435-1440. PubMed ID: 31299738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Assessing the influence of lower facial profile convexity on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson.
    Naini FB; Donaldson AN; McDonald F; Cobourne MT
    Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol; 2012 Sep; 114(3):303-11. PubMed ID: 22883980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Soft-tissue and dentoskeletal profile changes associated with mandibular setback osteotomy.
    Gjørup H; Athanasiou AE
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1991 Oct; 100(4):312-23. PubMed ID: 1927981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Proportions in the upper lip-lower lip-chin area of the lower face as determined by photogrammetric method.
    Anic-Milosevic S; Mestrovic S; Prlić A; Slaj M
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2010 Mar; 38(2):90-5. PubMed ID: 19447641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Is it possible to define the ideal lips?
    Kar M; Muluk NB; Bafaqeeh SA; Cingi C
    Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital; 2018 Feb; 38(1):67-72. PubMed ID: 29756617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Ideal proportions in full face front view, contemporary versus antique.
    Mommaerts MY; Moerenhout BA
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2011 Mar; 39(2):107-10. PubMed ID: 20542444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Evaluation of facial profile characteristics of aesthetically pleasing Iranian faces.
    Esmaeili S; Mohammadi NM; Khosravani S; Eslamian L; Motamedian SR
    J World Fed Orthod; 2023 Apr; 12(2):76-89. PubMed ID: 36906490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of Facial Proportions Between Beauty Pageant Contestants and Ordinary Young Women of Korean Ethnicity: A Three-Dimensional Photogrammetric Analysis.
    Kim SC; Kim HB; Jeong WS; Koh KS; Huh CH; Kim HJ; Lee WS; Choi JW
    Aesthetic Plast Surg; 2018 Jun; 42(3):748-758. PubMed ID: 29380023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. How does variation in lower anterior face height influence perceived attractiveness? A quantitative investigation.
    Naini FB; Donaldson AN; McDonald F; Cobourne MT
    J Orthod; 2013 Sep; 40(3):206-17. PubMed ID: 24009320
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Growth changes in the soft tissue facial profile.
    Nanda RS; Meng H; Kapila S; Goorhuis J
    Angle Orthod; 1990; 60(3):177-90. PubMed ID: 2389850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Vertical proportions of face: a cephalometric study.
    Kharbanda OP; Sidhu SS; Sundrum KR
    Int J Orthod; 1991; 29(3-4):6-8. PubMed ID: 1802874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Ideal soft tissue facial profile in Iranian females.
    Mafi P; Ghazisaeidi MR; Mafi A
    J Craniofac Surg; 2005 May; 16(3):508-11. PubMed ID: 15915129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The effects of extraction and nonextraction treatment on the mandibular position.
    Yamaguchi K; Nanda RS
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1991 Nov; 100(5):443-52. PubMed ID: 1951197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.