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 *

189 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19215745)

  • 41. Posterior resin-based composite: review of the literature.
    Burgess JO; Walker R; Davidson JM
    Pediatr Dent; 2002; 24(5):465-79. PubMed ID: 12412962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Clinical evaluation of Class II combined amalgam-composite restorations in primary molars after 6 to 30 months.
    Holan G; Chosack A; Eidelman E
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1996; 63(5):341-5. PubMed ID: 8958346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Placement technique for direct posterior composite restorations.
    Javaheri DS
    Pract Proced Aesthet Dent; 2001 Apr; 13(3):195-200; quiz 202. PubMed ID: 11360766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Selection of dental materials and longevity of replaced restorations in Public Dental Health clinics in northern Sweden.
    Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K; van Dijken JW; Funegård U; Lindberg A; Nilsson M
    J Dent; 2009 Sep; 37(9):673-8. PubMed ID: 19477572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Utilization of evidence-based informational resources for clinical decisions related to posterior composite restorations.
    Haj-Ali RN; Walker MP; Petrie CS; Williams K; Strain T
    J Dent Educ; 2005 Nov; 69(11):1251-6. PubMed ID: 16275688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. The composite resin restoration: a literature review, Part III. What the future holds.
    Full CA; Hollander WR
    ASDC J Dent Child; 1993; 60(1):57-9. PubMed ID: 8432949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. An overview of treatment considerations for esthetic restorations: a review of the literature.
    Sadowsky SJ
    J Prosthet Dent; 2006 Dec; 96(6):433-42. PubMed ID: 17174661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Survey of general dentists regarding posterior restorations, selection criteria, and associated clinical problems.
    Haj-Ali R; Walker MP; Williams K
    Gen Dent; 2005; 53(5):369-75; quiz 376, 367-8. PubMed ID: 16252541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. [Black or white--is amalgam 'out'? Part 1. Amalgam or composite: which of these 2 materials is the most deleterious?].
    De Moor R; Delmé K
    Rev Belge Med Dent (1984); 2008; 63(4):128-34. PubMed ID: 19227686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Restoration of endodontically treated teeth using a combined amalgam-composite resin technique.
    Fabra-Campos H
    Quintessence Int; 1992 Jul; 23(7):461-4. PubMed ID: 1410247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. A new condensable composite for the restoration of posterior teeth.
    Leinfelder K; Prasad A
    Dent Today; 1998 Feb; 17(2):112-6. PubMed ID: 9560676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings.
    da Rosa Rodolpho PA; Cenci MS; Donassollo TA; Loguércio AD; Demarco FF
    J Dent; 2006 Aug; 34(7):427-35. PubMed ID: 16314023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Has resin-based composite replaced amalgam?
    Christensen GJ; Child PL
    Dent Today; 2010 Feb; 29(2):108, 110. PubMed ID: 20196340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Longevity of occlusally-stressed restorations in posterior primary teeth.
    Hickel R; Kaaden C; Paschos E; Buerkle V; García-Godoy F; Manhart J
    Am J Dent; 2005 Jun; 18(3):198-211. PubMed ID: 16158813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Has resin-based composite replaced amalgam?
    Brown RS
    Dent Today; 2010 May; 29(5):16; author reply 16. PubMed ID: 20506909
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Dentists' restorative decision-making and implications for an 'amalgamless' profession. Part 4: clinical factor.
    Alexander G; Hopcraft MS; Tyas MJ; Wong R
    Aust Dent J; 2017 Sep; 62(3):363-371. PubMed ID: 28437002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Curriculum time compared to clinical procedures in amalgam and composite posterior restorations in U.S. dental schools: a preliminary study.
    Rey R; Nimmo S; Childs GS; Behar-Horenstein LS
    J Dent Educ; 2015 Mar; 79(3):331-6. PubMed ID: 25729027
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Trends in material choice for direct restorations by final year students from University College Cork 2004-2009.
    O'Sullivan CO; McKenna GJ; Burke FM
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2012 Mar; 20(1):31-4. PubMed ID: 22474934
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Dentists' restorative decision-making and implications for an 'amalgamless' profession. Part 1: a review.
    Alexander G; Hopcraft MS; Tyas MJ; Wong RH
    Aust Dent J; 2014 Dec; 59(4):408-19. PubMed ID: 25090909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Amalgam vs. composite resin: 1998.
    Christensen GJ
    J Am Dent Assoc; 1998 Dec; 129(12):1757-9. PubMed ID: 9854929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.