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 *

163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23597034)

  • 1. Photographic assessment of cephalometric measurements.
    de Carvalho Rosas Gomes L; Horta KO; Gandini LG; Gonçalves M; Gonçalves JR
    Angle Orthod; 2013 Nov; 83(6):1049-58. PubMed ID: 23597034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparative assessment of cephalometric with its analogous photographic variables.
    Gupta S; Tandon P; Singh GP; Shastri D
    Natl J Maxillofac Surg; 2022; 13(1):99-107. PubMed ID: 35911811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Correlations between cephalometric and facial photographic measurements of craniofacial form.
    Zhang X; Hans MG; Graham G; Kirchner HL; Redline S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2007 Jan; 131(1):67-71. PubMed ID: 17208108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Photographic Assessment of Cephalometric Measurements in Skeletal Class II Cases: A Comparative Study.
    Mehta P; Sagarkar RM; Mathew S
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2017 Jun; 11(6):ZC60-ZC64. PubMed ID: 28764295
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Photography versus lateral cephalogram: role in facial diagnosis.
    Patel DP; Trivedi R
    Indian J Dent Res; 2013; 24(5):587-92. PubMed ID: 24355960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Validity and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements obtained from digital photographs of analogue headfilms.
    Grybauskas S; Balciuniene I; Vetra J
    Stomatologija; 2007; 9(4):114-20. PubMed ID: 18303276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The accuracy of photographic soft-tissue profile analysis to determine Class II and vertical skeletal relationships in children.
    Becking BE; Fledderus AC; van Merkesteyn JPR; Jonkman REG
    Eur J Orthod; 2023 Nov; 45(6):703-711. PubMed ID: 37255251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of lateral photographic and radiographic sagittal analysis in relation to Angle's classification.
    Wasserstein A; Shpack N; Ben Yoseph Y; Geron S; Davidovitch M; Vardimon A
    J Orofac Orthop; 2015 Jul; 76(4):294-304. PubMed ID: 26123731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Photogrammetric reliability of frontal facial photographs with radiographs and anthropometric measurements.
    Negi G; Chitra P
    J Oral Biol Craniofac Res; 2019; 9(3):280-285. PubMed ID: 31289717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Measurement of the profile angle and the aesthetic analysis of the facial profile.
    Bass NM
    J Orthod; 2003 Mar; 30(1):3-9. PubMed ID: 12644600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Photogrammetric Correlation of Face with Frontal Radiographs and Direct Measurements.
    Negi G; Ponnada S; Aravind NKS; Chitra P
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2017 May; 11(5):ZC79-ZC83. PubMed ID: 28658914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Facial morphology in children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and moderate to severe temporomandibular joint involvement.
    Hsieh YJ; Darvann TA; Hermann NV; Larsen P; Liao YF; Bjoern-Joergensen J; Kreiborg S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2016 Feb; 149(2):182-91. PubMed ID: 26827974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparative study of cephalometric measurements using 3 imaging modalities.
    Wen J; Liu S; Ye X; Xie X; Li J; Li H; Mei L
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2017 Dec; 148(12):913-921. PubMed ID: 29042006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A computerized photographic assessment of the relationship between skeletal discrepancy and mandibular outline asymmetry.
    Good S; Edler R; Wertheim D; Greenhill D
    Eur J Orthod; 2006 Apr; 28(2):97-102. PubMed ID: 16431897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. The reliability of cephalometric measurements in oral and maxillofacial imaging: Cone beam computed tomography versus two-dimensional digital cephalograms.
    Hariharan A; Diwakar NR; Jayanthi K; Hema HM; Deepukrishna S; Ghaste SR
    Indian J Dent Res; 2016; 27(4):370-377. PubMed ID: 27723632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of cephalometric radiographs obtained from cone-beam computed tomography scans and conventional radiographs.
    van Vlijmen OJ; Bergé SJ; Swennen GR; Bronkhorst EM; Katsaros C; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2009 Jan; 67(1):92-7. PubMed ID: 19070753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The reliability and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements: a comparison of conventional and digital methods.
    Albarakati SF; Kula KS; Ghoneima AA
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2012 Jan; 41(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 22184624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Reliability of the integrated radiograph-photograph method to obtain natural head position in cephalometric diagnosis.
    Dvortsin DP; Ye Q; Pruim GJ; Dijkstra PU; Ren Y
    Angle Orthod; 2011 Sep; 81(5):889-94. PubMed ID: 21542723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Pharyngeal airway dimensions: a cephalometric, growth-study-based analysis of physiological variations in children aged 6-17.
    Mislik B; Hänggi MP; Signorelli L; Peltomäki TA; Patcas R
    Eur J Orthod; 2014 Jun; 36(3):331-9. PubMed ID: 24058163
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.