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.
361 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24012518)
1. Can the intra-examiner variability of Little's Irregularity Index be improved using 3D digital models of study casts? Dowling AH; Burns A; Macauley D; Garvey TM; Fleming GJ J Dent; 2013 Dec; 41(12):1271-80. PubMed ID: 24012518 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The reliability of Little's Irregularity Index for the upper dental arch using three dimensional (3D) digital models. Burns A; Dowling AH; Garvey TM; Fleming GJ J Dent; 2014 Oct; 42(10):1320-6. PubMed ID: 25064042 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Using Little's Irregularity Index in orthodontics: outdated and inaccurate? Macauley D; Garvey TM; Dowling AH; Fleming GJ J Dent; 2012 Dec; 40(12):1127-33. PubMed ID: 23000526 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Measurements using orthodontic analysis software on digital models obtained by 3D scans of plaster casts : Intrarater reliability and validity. Czarnota J; Hey J; Fuhrmann R J Orofac Orthop; 2016 Jan; 77(1):22-30. PubMed ID: 26753549 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Little's irregularity index: photographic assessment vs study model assessment. Almasoud N; Bearn D Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Dec; 138(6):787-94. PubMed ID: 21130338 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The reliability and validity of measurements of human dental casts made by an intra-oral 3D scanner, with conventional hand-held digital callipers as the comparison measure. Rajshekar M; Julian R; Williams AM; Tennant M; Forrest A; Walsh LJ; Wilson G; Blizzard L Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Sep; 278():198-204. PubMed ID: 28738248 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Measurement of the buccolingual inclination of teeth: manual technique vs 3-dimensional software. Nouri M; Abdi AH; Farzan A; Mokhtarpour F; Baghban AA Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Oct; 146(4):522-9. PubMed ID: 25263155 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements. Sousa MV; Vasconcelos EC; Janson G; Garib D; Pinzan A Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2012 Aug; 142(2):269-73. PubMed ID: 22858338 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparing the reliability and accuracy of clinical measurements using plaster model and the digital model system based on crowding severity. Liang YM; Rutchakitprakarn L; Kuang SH; Wu TY J Chin Med Assoc; 2018 Sep; 81(9):842-847. PubMed ID: 29395944 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. On the augmented reproducibility in measurements on 3D orthodontic digital dental models and the definition of feature points. Jacquet W; Nyssen E; Ibel G; Vannet BV Aust Orthod J; 2013 May; 29(1):28-33. PubMed ID: 23785935 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts. Leifert MF; Leifert MM; Efstratiadis SS; Cangialosi TJ Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):16.e1-4; discussion 16. PubMed ID: 19577140 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical use of a direct chairside oral scanner: an assessment of accuracy, time, and patient acceptance. Grünheid T; McCarthy SD; Larson BE Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Nov; 146(5):673-82. PubMed ID: 25439218 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Determination of Bolton tooth-size ratios by digitization, and comparison with the traditional method. Paredes V; Gandia JL; Cibrian R Eur J Orthod; 2006 Apr; 28(2):120-5. PubMed ID: 16373454 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of dental measurements between conventional plaster models, digital models obtained by impression scanning and plaster model scanning. Gül Amuk N; Karsli E; Kurt G Int Orthod; 2019 Mar; 17(1):151-158. PubMed ID: 30772351 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Examination of Bolton Index comparing the traditional method with a 2-dimensional digital measurement method. Roşu S; Zetu I; Ogodescu A; Veiszenbacher E; Mártha KI Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi; 2014; 118(1):205-8. PubMed ID: 24741801 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions. Wiranto MG; Engelbrecht WP; Tutein Nolthenius HE; van der Meer WJ; Ren Y Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Jan; 143(1):140-7. PubMed ID: 23273370 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The accuracy of a 3-D laser scanner for crown width measurements. Nouri M; Massudi R; Bagheban AA; Azimi S; Fereidooni F Aust Orthod J; 2009 May; 25(1):41-7. PubMed ID: 19634463 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of clinical bracket point registration with 3D laser scanner and coordinate measuring machine. Nouri M; Farzan A; Baghban AR; Massudi R Dental Press J Orthod; 2015; 20(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 25741826 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Validity, reliability and reproducibility of three methods used to measure tooth widths for bolton analyses. Naidu D; Scott J; Ong D; Ho CT Aust Orthod J; 2009 Nov; 25(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 20043542 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Digital images as an alternative to orthodontic casts in assessing malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need. Mok CW; Zhou L; McGrath C; Hägg U; Bendeus M Acta Odontol Scand; 2007 Nov; 65(6):362-8. PubMed ID: 18071959 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]