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.
156 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20203126)
21. Automated cephalometry: system performance reliability using landmark-dependent criteria. Tanikawa C; Yagi M; Takada K Angle Orthod; 2009 Nov; 79(6):1037-46. PubMed ID: 19852592 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Automatic craniofacial structure detection on cephalometric images. Mondal T; Jain A; Sardana HK IEEE Trans Image Process; 2011 Sep; 20(9):2606-14. PubMed ID: 21435982 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Reliability of landmark identification in cephalometric radiography acquired by a storage phosphor imaging system. Chen YJ; Chen SK; Huang HW; Yao CC; Chang HF Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Sep; 33(5):301-6. PubMed ID: 15585806 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Automatic 3-dimensional cephalometric landmarking based on active shape models in related projections. Montúfar J; Romero M; Scougall-Vilchis RJ Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2018 Mar; 153(3):449-458. PubMed ID: 29501121 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Determination of the relative parallelism of occlusal plane to three ala-tragal lines in various skeletal malocclusions: a cephalometric study. Venugopalan SK; SatishBabu CL; Rani MS Indian J Dent Res; 2012; 23(6):719-25. PubMed ID: 23649052 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Constrained active appearance models for segmentation of triplane echocardiograms. Hansegård J; Urheim S; Lunde K; Rabben SI IEEE Trans Med Imaging; 2007 Oct; 26(10):1391-400. PubMed ID: 17948729 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Are orthodontic landmarks and variables in digital cephalometric radiography taken in fixed and natural head positions reliable? Giannopoulou MA; Kondylidou-Sidira AC; Papadopoulos MA; Athanasiou AE Int Orthod; 2020 Mar; 18(1):54-68. PubMed ID: 31495758 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Variance of landmarks in digital evaluations: comparison between CT-based and conventional digital lateral cephalometric radiographs. Greiner M; Greiner A; Hirschfelder U J Orofac Orthop; 2007 Jul; 68(4):290-8. PubMed ID: 17639277 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. Crown-root shape of the permanent maxillary central incisor. McIntyre GT; Millett DT Angle Orthod; 2003 Dec; 73(6):710-5. PubMed ID: 14719737 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Sagittal and vertical growth of the jaws in Class II, Division 1 and Class II, Division 2 malocclusions during prepubertal and pubertal development. Lux CJ; Raeth O; Burden D; Conradt C; Komposch G J Orofac Orthop; 2004 Jul; 65(4):290-311. PubMed ID: 15289922 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Cranial-base morphology in adults with skeletal Class III malocclusion. Sanggarnjanavanich S; Sekiya T; Nomura Y; Nakayama T; Hanada N; Nakamura Y Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Jul; 146(1):82-91. PubMed ID: 24975002 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. An Automatic 3D Facial Landmarking Algorithm Using 2D Gabor Wavelets. de Jong MA; Wollstein A; Ruff C; Dunaway D; Hysi P; Spector T; Fan Liu ; Niessen W; Koudstaal MJ; Kayser M; Wolvius EB; Bohringer S IEEE Trans Image Process; 2016 Feb; 25(2):580-8. PubMed ID: 26540684 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Cephalometric evaluation of the predictability of bimaxillary surgical-orthodontic treatment outcomes in long face pattern patients: a retrospective study. Gimenez CM; Bertoz FA; Gabrielli MA; Magro Filho O; Garcia I; Pereira Filho VA Dental Press J Orthod; 2013; 18(5):53-8. PubMed ID: 24352388 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Discriminative face alignment. Liu X IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell; 2009 Nov; 31(11):1941-54. PubMed ID: 19762923 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Selecting subjects with high craniofacial shape homogeneity for clinical trials. Akli E; Marinaki L; Halazonetis DJ Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Dec; 148(6):1026-35. PubMed ID: 26672709 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Morphometry of the midfacial complex in subjects with class III malocclusions: Procrustes, Euclidean, and cephalometric analyses. Singh GD; McNamara JA; Lozanoff S Clin Anat; 1998; 11(3):162-70. PubMed ID: 9579588 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Landmark identification errors on cone-beam computed tomography-derived cephalograms and conventional digital cephalograms. Chang ZC; Hu FC; Lai E; Yao CC; Chen MH; Chen YJ Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Dec; 140(6):e289-97. PubMed ID: 22133963 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]