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.
108 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1814723)
1. [Reproducibility of measurements to assess the quality of dental restorations]. Dünninger P; Einwag J; Sitter H Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1991 Mar; 46(3):212-4. PubMed ID: 1814723 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of two methods for evaluating the occlusal marginal adaptation of posterior restorations. Kreulen CM; van Amerongen WE; Borgmeijer PJ; Akerboom HB ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(4-5):304-9. PubMed ID: 8258574 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [How good is the marginal adaptation of an "average" amalgam restoration?]. Wöstmann B; Lütke-Notarp E Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1991 Jan; 46(1):28-32. PubMed ID: 1811965 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Marginal adaptation of amalgam and resin composite restorations in Class II conservative preparations. Duncalf WV; Wilson NH Quintessence Int; 2001 May; 32(5):391-5. PubMed ID: 11444073 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Re-treatment decisions for failed posterior fillings by Finnish general practitioners. Heinikainen M; Vehkalahti M; Murtomaa H Community Dent Health; 2002 Jun; 19(2):98-103. PubMed ID: 12146589 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Student and faculty perceptions in the assessment of amalgam restorations. Owens BM J Tenn Dent Assoc; 2000; 80(2):28-31. PubMed ID: 11324025 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Coronal filling biomaterials. Criteria for selection]. Degrange M Real Clin; 1990 Jan; 1(1):9-26. PubMed ID: 2223672 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quality evaluation of anterior restorations in private practice. Allander L; Birkhed D; Bratthall D Swed Dent J; 1989; 13(4):141-50. PubMed ID: 2799660 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The influence of restorative material on the survival rate of restorations in primary molars. Papathanasiou AG; Curzon ME; Fairpo CG Pediatr Dent; 1994; 16(4):282-8. PubMed ID: 7937261 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The composite resin restoration: a literature review. Part II. Comparisons between composite and alloy restorations. Full CA; Hollander WR ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(1):52-6. PubMed ID: 8432948 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Amalgam. IX. Substitute for amalgam: durability of composite restorations]. Schuurs AH; van Amerongen JP Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 1993 Oct; 100(10):437-41. PubMed ID: 11822139 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Comparative evaluation of cast gold, amalgam, and composite in restoring retained roots. Samant A; Cinotti WR; Bardzinski M; Haeberle R Clin Prev Dent; 1988; 10(1):28-30. PubMed ID: 3078588 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. [Clinical evaluation of the quality of amalgam, acrylic and cast restorations. Results of a pilot study]. Pieper K; Motsch A; Sennhenn S; Färbom L Dtsch Zahnarztl Z; 1988 Aug; 43(8):874-9. PubMed ID: 3255586 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations. Opdam NJ; Bronkhorst EM; Roeters JM; Loomans BA Dent Mater; 2007 Jan; 23(1):2-8. PubMed ID: 16417916 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of glass-ionomer cements used to repair cast restorations. Carlson TJ; Naguib EA; Cochran MA; Lund MR Oper Dent; 1990; 15(5):162-6. PubMed ID: 2098724 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Endodontic complications after plastic restorations in general practice. Whitworth JM; Myers PM; Smith J; Walls AW; McCabe JF Int Endod J; 2005 Jun; 38(6):409-16. PubMed ID: 15910477 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]