160 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18950316)
1. Reliability of cranial base measurements on lateral skull radiographs.
Arponen H; Elf H; Evälahti M; Waltimo-Sirén J
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2008 Nov; 11(4):201-10. PubMed ID: 18950316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of speed, repeatability, and reproducibility of digital radiography with manual versus computer-assisted cephalometric analyses.
Uysal T; Baysal A; Yagci A
Eur J Orthod; 2009 Oct; 31(5):523-8. PubMed ID: 19443692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. The effects of differences in landmark identification on the cephalometric measurements in traditional versus digitized cephalometry.
Chen YJ; Chen SK; Yao JC; Chang HF
Angle Orthod; 2004 Apr; 74(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 15132440
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The accuracy of cephalometric tracing superimposition.
Gliddon MJ; Xia JJ; Gateno J; Wong HT; Lasky RE; Teichgraeber JF; Jia X; Liebschner MA; Lemoine JJ
J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2006 Feb; 64(2):194-202. PubMed ID: 16413890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Are collimated low-dose digital radiographs valid for performing Delaire's architectural analysis?
Stamm T; Meier N; Hohoff A; Meyer U; Heinecke A; Joos U
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2003 Dec; 32(6):600-5. PubMed ID: 14636609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. The reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks: an experimental study on skulls.
Hägg U; Cooke MS; Chan TC; Tng TT; Lau PY
Aust Orthod J; 1998 Oct; 15(3):177-85. PubMed ID: 10204427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Introduction of a three-dimensional anthropometry of the viscerocranium. Part I: measurement of craniofacial development and establishment of standard values and growth functions.
Landes CA; Bitsakis J; Diehl T; Bitter K
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2002 Feb; 30(1):18-24. PubMed ID: 12064879
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Is there consistency in cephalometric landmark identification amongst oral and maxillofacial surgeons?
Miloro M; Borba AM; Ribeiro-Junior O; Naclério-Homem MG; Jungner M
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2014 Apr; 43(4):445-53. PubMed ID: 24055177
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. Comparative cephalometric errors for orthodontic and surgical patients.
Wah PL; Cooke MS; Hägg U
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1995; 10(2):119-26. PubMed ID: 9081997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of training and experience on cephalometric measurement errors on surgical patients.
Lau PY; Cooke MS; Hägg U
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1997; 12(3):204-13. PubMed ID: 9511491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings.
Sayinsu K; Isik F; Trakyali G; Arun T
Eur J Orthod; 2007 Feb; 29(1):105-8. PubMed ID: 17290023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Errors in landmarking and the evaluation of the accuracy of traditional and 3D anthropometry.
Kouchi M; Mochimaru M
Appl Ergon; 2011 Mar; 42(3):518-27. PubMed ID: 20947062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of reproducibility and reliability of 3D soft tissue analysis using 3D stereophotogrammetry.
Plooij JM; Swennen GR; Rangel FA; Maal TJ; Schutyser FA; Bronkhorst EM; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM; Bergé SJ
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2009 Mar; 38(3):267-73. PubMed ID: 19167191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Traditional plaster casts and dental digital models: intra-examiner reliability of measurements.
Mangiacapra R; Butti AC; Salvato A; Biagi R
Prog Orthod; 2009; 10(2):48-53. PubMed ID: 20545091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of computerized automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks.
Liu JK; Chen YT; Cheng KS
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Nov; 118(5):535-40. PubMed ID: 11094367
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Asterion as a surgical landmark for lateral cranial base approaches.
Ucerler H; Govsa F
J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2006 Oct; 34(7):415-20. PubMed ID: 16963269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comparison of the reproducibility of manual tracing and on-screen digitization for cephalometric profile variables.
Dvortsin DP; Sandham A; Pruim GJ; Dijkstra PU
Eur J Orthod; 2008 Dec; 30(6):586-91. PubMed ID: 18719051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
