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 *

135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23277829)

  • 1. Assessment of Intra- and Inter-examiner Reproducibility of Probing Depth Measurements with a Manual Periodontal Probe.
    Lafzi A; Mohammadi AS; Eskandari A; Pourkhamneh S
    J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects; 2007; 1(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 23277829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Intra- and inter-examiner reproducibility of manual probing depth.
    Andrade R; Espinoza M; Gómez EM; Espinoza JR; Cruz E
    Braz Oral Res; 2012; 26(1):57-63. PubMed ID: 22344339
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Intra - and inter-examiner reproducibility in constant force probing.
    Wang SF; Leknes KN; Zimmerman GJ; Sigurdsson TJ; Wikesjö UM; Selvig KA
    J Clin Periodontol; 1995 Dec; 22(12):918-22. PubMed ID: 8613559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Reliability of probing depth assessments at healthy implant sites and natural teeth.
    Ramanauskaite A; Obreja K; Schwarz F; Jepsen K; Cosgarea R; Bunke J; Eisenbeiss AK; Schulz J; Flörke C; Eberhard C; Kocher T; Jablonowski L; Jepsen S; Holtfreter B
    Clin Oral Investig; 2023 Jun; 27(6):2533-2545. PubMed ID: 36462039
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy and reproducibility of two manual periodontal probes. An in vitro study.
    Buduneli E; Aksoy O; Köse T; Atilla G
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Oct; 31(10):815-9. PubMed ID: 15367182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Clinical evaluation of electronic and manual constant force probes.
    Khocht A; Chang KM
    J Periodontol; 1998 Jan; 69(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 9527557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Inter-examiner reproducibility of probing pocket depths in molar furcation sites.
    Moriarty JD; Scheitler LE; Hutchens LH; Delong ER
    J Clin Periodontol; 1988 Jan; 15(1):68-72. PubMed ID: 3422247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Periodontal assessment by right- and left-handed examiners: is there a difference?
    Khan SM; Blanchard SB; Dowsett SA; Eckert GJ; Kowolik MJ
    J Periodontol; 2006 Jul; 77(7):1099-103. PubMed ID: 16805670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Reproducibility of Manual Periodontal Probing Following a Comprehensive Standardization and Calibration Training Program.
    Fitzgerald BP; Hawley CE; Harrold CQ; Garrett JS; Polson AM; Rams TE
    J Oral Biol (Northborough); 2022 Jun; 8(1):. PubMed ID: 36225716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of probing attachment levels using a CEJ probe versus traditional probes.
    Karpinia K; Magnusson I; Gibbs C; Yang MC
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Mar; 31(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 15016020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. In-vitro accuracy and reproducibility evaluation of probing depth measurements of selected periodontal probes.
    Al Shayeb KN; Turner W; Gillam DG
    Saudi Dent J; 2014 Jan; 26(1):19-24. PubMed ID: 24526824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of measurement variability in subjects with moderate periodontitis using a conventional and constant force periodontal probe.
    Osborn JB; Stoltenberg JL; Huso BA; Aeppli DM; Pihlstrom BL
    J Periodontol; 1992 Apr; 63(4):283-9. PubMed ID: 1573541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Sources of error for periodontal probing measurements.
    Grossi SG; Dunford RG; Ho A; Koch G; Machtei EE; Genco RJ
    J Periodontal Res; 1996 Jul; 31(5):330-6. PubMed ID: 8858537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparison of measurement variability using a standard and constant force periodontal probe.
    Osborn J; Stoltenberg J; Huso B; Aeppli D; Pihlstrom B
    J Periodontol; 1990 Aug; 61(8):497-503. PubMed ID: 2391627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparative evaluation of probing depth and clinical attachment level using a manual probe and Florida probe.
    Kour A; Kumar A; Puri K; Khatri M; Bansal M; Gupta G
    J Indian Soc Periodontol; 2016; 20(3):299-306. PubMed ID: 27563204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of manual and pressure-controlled periodontal probing.
    Kalkwarf KL; Kaldahl WB; Patil KD
    J Periodontol; 1986 Aug; 57(8):467-71. PubMed ID: 3528451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Variables affecting the inter- and intra-examiner reliability of ICDAS for occlusal caries diagnosis in permanent molars.
    Qudeimat MA; Alomari QD; Altarakemah Y; Alshawaf N; Honkala EJ
    J Public Health Dent; 2016; 76(1):9-16. PubMed ID: 26095924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Impact of clinical experience on the accuracy of probing depth measurements.
    Seabra RC; Costa FO; Costa JE; Van Dyke T; Soares RV
    Quintessence Int; 2008; 39(7):559-65. PubMed ID: 19107263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. In vitro performance of DIAGNOdent laser fluorescence device for dental calculus detection on human tooth root surfaces.
    Rams TE; Alwaqyan AY
    Saudi Dent J; 2017 Oct; 29(4):171-178. PubMed ID: 29033528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Level of patient comfort and measurement reproducibility of three different probes: A cross-sectional study.
    Flores-Rodrigo D; Meza-Mauricio J; Retamal-Valdes B; Mayta-Tovalino F; Mendoza-Azpur G
    Int J Dent Hyg; 2022 May; 20(2):301-307. PubMed ID: 34390316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.