340 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18068604)
21. Comparison of cephalometric measurements with digital versus conventional cephalometric analysis.
Celik E; Polat-Ozsoy O; Toygar Memikoglu TU
Eur J Orthod; 2009 Jun; 31(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 19237509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison of hand-traced and computerized cephalograms: landmark identification, measurement, and superimposition accuracy.
Roden-Johnson D; English J; Gallerano R
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Apr; 133(4):556-64. PubMed ID: 18405820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Reliability of computer-generated cephalometrics.
Nimkarn Y; Miles PG
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1995; 10(1):43-52. PubMed ID: 9081992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. [Digital cephalometrics].
Ongkosuwito EM; Katsaros C; Bodegom JC; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2004 Jul; 111(7):266-70. PubMed ID: 15315105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. 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]
26. Picture archiving and communications systems: a study of reliability of orthodontic cephalometric analysis.
Tan SS; Ahmad S; Moles DR; Cunningham SJ
Eur J Orthod; 2011 Oct; 33(5):537-43. PubMed ID: 21106665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Accuracy of cephalometric landmarks on monitor-displayed radiographs with and without image emboss enhancement.
Leonardi RM; Giordano D; Maiorana F; Greco M
Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 20022892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Effect of image compression of digital lateral cephalograms on the reproducibility of cephalometric points.
Duarte H; Vieck R; Siqueira DF; Angelieri F; Bommarito S; Dalben G; Sannomiya EK
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2009 Sep; 38(6):393-400. PubMed ID: 19700533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Reproducibility of cephalometric measurements made by three radiology clinics.
da Silveira HL; Silveira HE
Angle Orthod; 2006 May; 76(3):394-9. PubMed ID: 16637717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Reliability of landmark identification on monitor-displayed lateral cephalometric images.
Yu SH; Nahm DS; Baek SH
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Jun; 133(6):790.e1-6; discussion e1. PubMed ID: 18538235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Landmark identification on direct digital versus film-based cephalometric radiographs: a human skull study.
Schulze RK; Gloede MB; Doll GM
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2002 Dec; 122(6):635-42. PubMed ID: 12490875
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Measurements of linear dimensions on fundus photographs: comparison between photographic film and digital systems.
Musadiq M; Patsoura E; Hughes S; Yang YC
Eye (Lond); 2003 Jul; 17(5):619-22. PubMed ID: 12855971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Comparison of conventional and cone beam CT synthesized cephalograms.
Kumar V; Ludlow JB; Mol A; Cevidanes L
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2007 Jul; 36(5):263-9. PubMed ID: 17586852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Landmark identification errors on cone-beam computed tomography-derived cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms.
Chang ZC; Hu FC; Lai E; Yao CC; Chen MH; Chen YJ
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Dec; 140(6):e289-97. PubMed ID: 22133963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts.
Leifert MF; Leifert MM; Efstratiadis SS; Cangialosi TJ
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):16.e1-4; discussion 16. PubMed ID: 19577140
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Comparison of landmark identification in traditional versus computer-aided digital cephalometry.
Chen YJ; Chen SK; Chang HF; Chen KC
Angle Orthod; 2000 Oct; 70(5):387-92. PubMed ID: 11036999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Analysis of low-dose digital lateral cephalometric radiographs.
Näslund EB; Kruger M; Petersson A; Hansen K
Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 1998 May; 27(3):136-9. PubMed ID: 9693525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. A comparison of cephalometric measurements: a picture archiving and communication system versus the hand-tracing method--a preliminary study.
Singh P; Davies TI
Eur J Orthod; 2011 Aug; 33(4):350-3. PubMed ID: 20923935
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Digital imaging in the assessment of facial deformity.
Fanibunda KB; Thomas PR
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 1999 Apr; 37(2):94-8. PubMed ID: 10371308
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. A proposal for soft tissue landmarks for craniofacial analysis using 3-dimensional laser scan imaging.
Baik HS; Lee HJ; Lee KJ
World J Orthod; 2006; 7(1):7-14. PubMed ID: 16548301
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
