224 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23118970)
1. Reproducibility of Frankfort horizontal plane on 3D multi-planar reconstructed MR images.
Daboul A; Schwahn C; Schaffner G; Soehnel S; Samietz S; Aljaghsi A; Habes M; Hegenscheid K; Puls R; Klinke T; Biffar R
PLoS One; 2012; 7(10):e48281. PubMed ID: 23118970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Reproducibility of facial soft tissue landmarks on 3D laser-scanned facial images.
Toma AM; Zhurov A; Playle R; Ong E; Richmond S
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2009 Feb; 12(1):33-42. PubMed ID: 19154273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Three-dimensional Frankfort horizontal plane for 3D cephalometry: a comparative assessment of conventional versus novel landmarks and horizontal planes.
Pittayapat P; Jacobs R; Bornstein MM; Odri GA; Lambrichts I; Willems G; Politis C; Olszewski R
Eur J Orthod; 2018 May; 40(3):239-248. PubMed ID: 29016738
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. United Reference Method for three-dimensional treatment evaluation.
Shahen S; Lagravère MO; Carrino G; Fahim F; Abdelsalam R; Flores-Mir C; Perillo L
Prog Orthod; 2018 Dec; 19(1):47. PubMed ID: 30506410
[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. Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmarking and Frankfort Horizontal Plane Construction: Reproducibility of Conventional and Novel Landmarks.
Dot G; Rafflenbeul F; Kerbrat A; Rouch P; Gajny L; Schouman T
J Clin Med; 2021 Nov; 10(22):. PubMed ID: 34830583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A study on the reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks when undertaking a three-dimensional (3D) cephalometric analysis.
Zamora N; Llamas JM; Cibrián R; Gandia JL; Paredes V
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2012 Jul; 17(4):e678-88. PubMed ID: 22322503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparative validity and reproducibility study of various landmark-oriented reference planes in 3-dimensional computed tomographic analysis for patients receiving orthognathic surgery.
Lin HH; Chuang YF; Weng JL; Lo LJ
PLoS One; 2015; 10(2):e0117604. PubMed ID: 25668209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. In vivo reliability of 3D cephalometric landmark determination on magnetic resonance imaging: a feasibility study.
Juerchott A; Freudlsperger C; Zingler S; Saleem MA; Jende JME; Lux CJ; Bendszus M; Heiland S; Hilgenfeld T
Clin Oral Investig; 2020 Mar; 24(3):1339-1349. PubMed ID: 31352517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Validity and reliability of ankle morphological measurements on computerized tomography-synthesized planar radiographs.
Kuo CC; Lu HL; Lu TW; Leardini A; Kuo MY; Hsu HC
Biomed Eng Online; 2016 Aug; 15(1):92. PubMed ID: 27495933
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Landmarks of the Frankfort horizontal plane : Reliability in a three-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system.
Hofmann E; Fimmers R; Schmid M; Hirschfelder U; Detterbeck A; Hertrich K
J Orofac Orthop; 2016 Sep; 77(5):373-83. PubMed ID: 27502792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Trunk Muscle Size and Composition Assessment in Older Adults with Chronic Low Back Pain: An Intra-Examiner and Inter-Examiner Reliability Study.
Sions JM; Smith AC; Hicks GE; Elliott JM
Pain Med; 2016 Aug; 17(8):1436-46. PubMed ID: 26814258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Quantitative measures of modic changes in lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging: intra- and inter-rater reliability.
Wang Y; Videman T; Niemeläinen R; Battié MC
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2011 Jul; 36(15):1236-43. PubMed ID: 21217445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Reliability of Cusp Angulation Using Three-Dimensional Digital Models: A Preliminary In Vitro Study.
Liu X; Chen X
Methods Inf Med; 2022 Sep; 61(3-04):90-98. PubMed ID: 35668665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Clinical validation of coronal and sagittal spinal curve measurements based on three-dimensional vertebra vector parameters.
Somoskeöy S; Tunyogi-Csapó M; Bogyó C; Illés T
Spine J; 2012 Oct; 12(10):960-8. PubMed ID: 23018164
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Inter-rater reliability and double reading analysis of an automated three-dimensional breast ultrasound system: comparison of two independent examiners.
Maier A; Heil J; Lauer A; Harcos A; Schaefgen B; von Au A; Spratte J; Riedel F; Rauch G; Hennigs A; Domschke C; Schott S; Rom J; Schuetz F; Sohn C; Golatta M
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2017 Sep; 296(3):571-582. PubMed ID: 28748340
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Reproducibility of Novel Soft-Tissue Landmarks on Three-Dimensional Human Facial Scan Images in Caucasian and Asian.
Li Z; Giunta RE; Frank K; Schenck TL; Koban KC
Aesthetic Plast Surg; 2022 Apr; 46(2):719-731. PubMed ID: 34704125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy and reliability of coronal and sagittal spinal curvature data based on patient-specific three-dimensional models created by the EOS 2D/3D imaging system.
Somoskeöy S; Tunyogi-Csapó M; Bogyó C; Illés T
Spine J; 2012 Nov; 12(11):1052-9. PubMed ID: 23102842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Precision of manual landmark identification between as-received and oriented volume-rendered cone-beam computed tomography images.
Gupta A; Kharbanda OP; Balachandran R; Sardana V; Kalra S; Chaurasia S; Sardana HK
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Jan; 151(1):118-131. PubMed ID: 28024764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Test-retest reliability of mandibular morphology measurements on cone-beam computed tomography-synthesized cephalograms with random head positioning errors.
Lin HS; Chen YJ; Lu HL; Lu TW; Chen CC
Biomed Eng Online; 2017 May; 16(1):62. PubMed ID: 28558778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
