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 *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18220006)

  • 1. Logistics in digital orthodontic models.
    Lemay M
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2007; 18(4):25-8. PubMed ID: 18220006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.
    Rheude B; Sadowsky PL; Ferriera A; Jacobson A
    Angle Orthod; 2005 May; 75(3):300-4. PubMed ID: 15898364
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of the accuracy of digital model analysis for the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system for dental casts.
    Costalos PA; Sarraf K; Cangialosi TJ; Efstratiadis S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Nov; 128(5):624-9. PubMed ID: 16286210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of a software program for applying the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system to digital casts.
    Hildebrand JC; Palomo JM; Palomo L; Sivik M; Hans M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Feb; 133(2):283-9. PubMed ID: 18249296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts.
    Okunami TR; Kusnoto B; BeGole E; Evans CA; Sadowsky C; Fadavi S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Jan; 131(1):51-6. PubMed ID: 17208106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Variations in orthodontic treatment planning decisions of Class II patients between virtual 3-dimensional models and traditional plaster study models.
    Whetten JL; Williamson PC; Heo G; Varnhagen C; Major PW
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Oct; 130(4):485-91. PubMed ID: 17045148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of peer assessment rating (PAR) index scores of plaster and computer-based digital models.
    Mayers M; Firestone AR; Rashid R; Vig KW
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Oct; 128(4):431-4. PubMed ID: 16214623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements.
    Stevens DR; Flores-Mir C; Nebbe B; Raboud DW; Heo G; Major PW
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Jun; 129(6):794-803. PubMed ID: 16769498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Interview with a SureSmile doctor: Nicole M. Jane. Interview by Robert P. Scholz.
    Jane NM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Apr; 135(4 Suppl):S140-3. PubMed ID: 19362265
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Digital diagnosis records in orthodontics. An overview.
    Paredes V; Gandia JL; Cibrián R
    Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2006 Jan; 11(1):E88-93. PubMed ID: 16388303
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. OrthoCAD: digital models for a digital era.
    Joffe L
    J Orthod; 2004 Dec; 31(4):344-7. PubMed ID: 15608352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Three-dimensional imaging of orthodontic models: a pilot study.
    Asquith J; Gillgrass T; Mossey P
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Oct; 29(5):517-22. PubMed ID: 17974542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. [The comparison analysis of the line measurements between plaster and virtual orthodontic 3D models].
    Jedlińska A
    Ann Acad Med Stetin; 2008; 54(2):106-13. PubMed ID: 19374240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy and validity of space analysis and irregularity index measurements using digital models.
    Goonewardene RW; Goonewardene MS; Razza JM; Murray K
    Aust Orthod J; 2008 Nov; 24(2):83-90. PubMed ID: 19113071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Digital and plaster models: a comparison of measurements and times.
    Gracco A; Buranello M; Cozzani M; Siciliani G
    Prog Orthod; 2007; 8(2):252-9. PubMed ID: 18030371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Indirect bonding of brackets: don't wait another day!
    Pellan P
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2007; 18(3):11-7. PubMed ID: 17958261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Orthodontic scanners: what's available?
    Martin CB; Chalmers EV; McIntyre GT; Cochrane H; Mossey PA
    J Orthod; 2015 Jun; 42(2):136-43. PubMed ID: 25939980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Application and prospect of digital technology in the field of orthodontics].
    Zhou YH
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2016 Jun; 51(6):321-5. PubMed ID: 27256523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need scored on plaster and digital models.
    Veenema AC; Katsaros C; Boxum SC; Bronkhorst EM; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Jun; 31(3):281-6. PubMed ID: 19329650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.