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 *

122 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1911699)

  • 21. On the relevance of "ideal" occlusion concepts for incisor inclination target definition.
    Knösel M; Jung K
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Nov; 140(5):652-9. PubMed ID: 22051485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Reliability of cephalometric analysis using manual and interactive computer methods.
    Davis DN; Mackay F
    Br J Orthod; 1991 May; 18(2):105-9. PubMed ID: 1911687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The Barry Project--a further assessment of occlusal treatment change in a consecutive sample: crowding and arch dimensions.
    Jones ML
    Br J Orthod; 1990 Nov; 17(4):269-85. PubMed ID: 2285695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Comparison of arch dimension changes in 1-phase vs 2-phase treatment of Class II malocclusion.
    Wortham JR; Dolce C; McGorray SP; Le H; King GJ; Wheeler TT
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):65-74. PubMed ID: 19577150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Radiographic examinations as an aid to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.
    Bruks A; Enberg K; Nordqvist I; Hansson AS; Jansson L; Svenson B
    Swed Dent J; 1999; 23(2-3):77-85. PubMed ID: 10431343
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Balancing the books on orthodontic treatment: an integrated analysis of change.
    Johnston LE
    Br J Orthod; 1996 May; 23(2):93-102. PubMed ID: 8771331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The Barry Project--a three-dimensional assessment of occlusal treatment change in a consecutively referred sample: the incisors.
    Jones ML
    Br J Orthod; 1990 Feb; 17(1):1-19. PubMed ID: 2310735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparison of progressive cephalometric changes and postsurgical stability of skeletal Class III correction with and without presurgical orthodontic treatment.
    Ko EW; Hsu SS; Hsieh HY; Wang YC; Huang CS; Chen YR
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2011 May; 69(5):1469-77. PubMed ID: 21256648
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comparison of the dental arch changes in patients with different malocclusions.
    Singh DP; Garg AK; Singh SP; Krishna Nayak US; Gupta M
    Indian J Dent Res; 2014; 25(5):623-9. PubMed ID: 25511063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Intra-observer reliability and agreement of manual and digital orthodontic model analysis.
    Koretsi V; Tingelhoff L; Proff P; Kirschneck C
    Eur J Orthod; 2018 Jan; 40(1):52-57. PubMed ID: 28531341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Association between post-orthodontic treatment gingival margin alterations and symphysis dimensions.
    Closs LQ; Bortolini LF; dos Santos-Pinto A; Rösing CK
    Acta Odontol Latinoam; 2014; 27(3):125-30. PubMed ID: 25560691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Longitudinal observation of mandibular motion pattern in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion subsequent to orthognathic surgery.
    Wen-Ching Ko E; Huang CS; Lo LJ; Chen YR
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2012 Feb; 70(2):e158-68. PubMed ID: 22260918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Three-dimensional analysis of the change in the curvature of the smiling line following orthodontic treatment in incisor class II division 1 malocclusion.
    Mah M; Tan WC; Ong SH; Chan YH; Foong K
    Eur J Orthod; 2014 Dec; 36(6):657-64. PubMed ID: 23771899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of treatment outcomes with banded and bonded RPE appliances.
    Reed N; Ghosh J; Nanda RS
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1999 Jul; 116(1):31-40. PubMed ID: 10393578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Profile of an orthodontic patient at risk of dental trauma.
    Brin I; Ben-Bassat Y; Heling I; Brezniak N
    Endod Dent Traumatol; 2000 Jun; 16(3):111-5. PubMed ID: 11202866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A comparison of two- and three-dimensional incisor angles.
    Richmond S; Jones ML
    Br J Orthod; 1985 Apr; 12(2):90-6. PubMed ID: 3859331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Mandibular dental arch changes associated with treatment of crowding using self-ligating and conventional brackets.
    Pandis N; Polychronopoulou A; Makou M; Eliades T
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):248-53. PubMed ID: 19959610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The validity of two methods of mandibular superimposition: a comparison with tantalum implants.
    Springate SD; Jones AG
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1998 Mar; 113(3):263-70. PubMed ID: 9517716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Dental and skeletal outcomes for Class II surgical-orthodontic treatment: A comparison between novice and experienced clinicians.
    Potts B; Fields HW; Shanker S; Vig KW; Beck FM
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Mar; 139(3):305-15. PubMed ID: 21392684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Trabecular and cortical bone as risk factors for orthodontic relapse.
    Rothe LE; Bollen AM; Little RM; Herring SW; Chaison JB; Chen CS; Hollender LG
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Oct; 130(4):476-84. PubMed ID: 17045147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.