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 *

276 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17920500)

  • 81. Craniofacial characteristics of patients with heart disease.
    Goldner MT; Martins e Martins M; Quintão CC; Mendes Ade M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Oct; 136(4):554-8. PubMed ID: 19815158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 82. Morphometric correlation between facial soft-tissue profile shape and skeletal pattern in children and adolescents.
    Halazonetis DJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Oct; 132(4):450-7. PubMed ID: 17920497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 83. Profile changes of patients treated with and without premolar extractions.
    Erdinc AE; Nanda RS; Dandajena TC
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Sep; 132(3):324-31. PubMed ID: 17826600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 84. Cephalometric indicators of the vertical dimension of occlusion.
    Strajnić L; Stanisić-Sinobad D; Marković D; Stojanović L
    Coll Antropol; 2008 Jun; 32(2):535-41. PubMed ID: 18756907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 85. Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions.
    Abu Arqoub SH; Al-Khateeb SN
    Eur J Orthod; 2011 Feb; 33(1):103-11. PubMed ID: 20558590
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 86. [Facial analysis without cephalometric radiography].
    Remmelink HJ; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2000 Apr; 107(4):141-4. PubMed ID: 11382969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 87. A comparison of the perception of facial profile by the general public and 3 groups of clinicians.
    Cochrane SM; Cunningham SJ; Hunt NP
    Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1999; 14(4):291-5. PubMed ID: 10895644
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 88. The use of parental data to evaluate soft tissues in an Anatolian Turkish population according to Holdaway soft tissue norms.
    Gelgör IE; Karaman AI; Zekiç E
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Mar; 129(3):330.e1-9. PubMed ID: 16527625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 89. Soft-tissue treatment changes in Class II Division 1 malocclusion with and without extraction of maxillary premolars.
    Janson G; Fuziy A; de Freitas MR; Castanha Henriques JF; de Almeida RR
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Dec; 132(6):729.e1-8. PubMed ID: 18068588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 90. Divine proportions and facial esthetics after manipulation of frontal photographs.
    Medici Filho E; Martins MV; dos Santos da Silva MA; Castilho JC; de Moraes LC; Gil CT
    World J Orthod; 2007; 8(2):103-8. PubMed ID: 17580503
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 91. A comparison of 15 year old children with excellent occlusion and with crowding of the teeth, Angle Class I malocclusion, in respect of face size and shape and tooth size.
    Adams CP
    Swed Dent J Suppl; 1982; 15():11-26. PubMed ID: 6963765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 92. Dental maturity amongst various vertical and sagittal facial patterns.
    Sukhia RH; Fida M
    J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2010 Apr; 20(4):225-8. PubMed ID: 20392395
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 93. Soft tissue facial planes and masticatory muscle function in skeletal Class III patients before and after orthognathic surgery treatment.
    Sforza C; Peretta R; Grandi G; Ferronato G; Ferrario VF
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2008 Apr; 66(4):691-8. PubMed ID: 18355592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 94. Standards of soft tissue Arnett analysis for surgical planning in Turkish adults.
    Uysal T; Yagci A; Basciftci FA; Sisman Y
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Aug; 31(4):449-56. PubMed ID: 19482876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 95. Significance of the soft tissue profile on facial esthetics.
    Spyropoulos MN; Halazonetis DJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 May; 119(5):464-71. PubMed ID: 11343017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 96. Soft tissue facial changes using Biobloc appliances: geometric morphometrics.
    Singh D; Medina LE; Hang WM
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2009; 20(2):29-34. PubMed ID: 19739499
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 97. Evaluation of changes in the vertical facial dimension with different anchorage systems in extraction and non-extraction subjects treated by Begg fixed appliances: a retrospective study.
    Alkumru P; Erdem D; Altug-Atac AT
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Oct; 29(5):508-16. PubMed ID: 17974541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 98. Photometric analysis of esthetically pleasant and unpleasant facial profile.
    Fortes HN; Guimarães TC; Belo IM; da Matta EN
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(2):66-75. PubMed ID: 24945516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 99. The effects of computer-aided anteroposterior maxillary incisor movement on ratings of facial attractiveness.
    Schlosser JB; Preston CB; Lampasso J
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Jan; 127(1):17-24. PubMed ID: 15643410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 100. [Study on perception of Shanghai population with labial profile].
    Tang GH; Ji GP; Ding XJ
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2003 Apr; 12(2):99-102. PubMed ID: 14661511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.