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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20072746)

  • 1. Soft tissue cephalometrics: an overdue evaluation.
    Seliem EN; Attia KH; Al-Hadithiy S; Mostafa YA
    World J Orthod; 2009; 10(4):301-4. PubMed ID: 20072746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Three-dimensional facial morphometry and conventional cephalometrics: a correlation study.
    Ferrario VF; Sforza C; Puleo A; Poggio CE; Schmitz JH
    Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1996; 11(4):329-38. PubMed ID: 9456609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A comparative study of two methods of quantifying the soft tissue profile.
    Hwang HS; Kim WS; McNamara JA
    Angle Orthod; 2000 Jun; 70(3):200-7. PubMed ID: 10926429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Diagnostic concordance between skeletal cephalometrics, radiograph-based soft-tissue cephalometrics, and photograph-based soft-tissue cephalometrics.
    Nucera R; Lo Giudice A; Bellocchio M; Spinuzza P; Caprioglio A; Cordasco G
    Eur J Orthod; 2017 Aug; 39(4):352-357. PubMed ID: 27932406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Lateral cephalometric norms for adolescent Kuwaitis: soft tissue measurements.
    Al-Azemi R; Al-Jame B; Artun J
    Med Princ Pract; 2008; 17(3):215-20. PubMed ID: 18408390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of combined maxillary and mandibular repositioning and of soft tissue prediction in relation to maxillary antero-superior repositioning combined with mandibular set back A computerized cephalometric evaluation of the immediate postsurgical outcome using the TIOPS planning system.
    Donatsky O; Bjørn-Jørgensen J; Hermund NU; Nielsen H; Holmqvist-Larsen M; Nerder PH
    J Craniomaxillofac Surg; 2009 Jul; 37(5):279-84. PubMed ID: 19188076
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Profile enhancement and cephalometric landmark identification.
    Burger HJ; Rossouw PE; Stander I
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1994 Mar; 105(3):250-6. PubMed ID: 8135208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Lateral facial soft-tissue prediction model: analysis using Fourier shape descriptors and traditional cephalometric methods.
    Rose AD; Woods MG; Clement JG; Thomas CD
    Am J Phys Anthropol; 2003 Jun; 121(2):172-80. PubMed ID: 12740960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of reconstructed images from cone-beam computed tomography scans.
    Lamichane M; Anderson NK; Rigali PH; Seldin EB; Will LA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Aug; 136(2):156.e1-6; discussion 156-7. PubMed ID: 19651340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A method of magnification correction for posteroanterior radiographic cephalometry.
    Hsiao TH; Chang HP; Liu KM
    Angle Orthod; 1997; 67(2):137-42. PubMed ID: 9107378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Skeletal-versus soft-tissue-based cephalometric analyses: is the correlation reproducible?
    Ploder O; Köhnke R; Winsauer H; Götz C; Bissinger O; Haller B; Kolk A
    Acta Odontol Scand; 2019 Mar; 77(2):135-141. PubMed ID: 30394163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of scanned lateral cephalograms with corresponding original radiographs.
    Bruntz LQ; Palomo JM; Baden S; Hans MG
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Sep; 130(3):340-8. PubMed ID: 16979492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Retrospective evaluation of facial soft tissue cephalometric parameters in adolescents with normal occlusion.
    Poosti M; Ramezanzadeh B; Salehi T; Rashed R
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2010; 21(2):15-8. PubMed ID: 20687311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Evaluation of the influence of patient positioning on the reliability of lateral cephalometry.
    David OT; Tuce RA; Munteanu O; Neagu A; Panainte I
    Radiol Med; 2017 Jul; 122(7):520-529. PubMed ID: 28271360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A new method for locating anterior skeletal landmarks from soft tissue measurements.
    Ligthelm-Bakker AS; Prahl-Andersen B; Wattel E; Uljee IH
    J Biol Buccale; 1991 Dec; 19(4):283-90. PubMed ID: 1791165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparison of sonically derived and traditional cephalometric values.
    Hall DL; Bollen AM
    Angle Orthod; 1997; 67(5):365-72. PubMed ID: 9347110
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.