492 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24373661)
1. Accuracy and reproducibility of dental replica models reconstructed by different rapid prototyping techniques.
Hazeveld A; Huddleston Slater JJ; Ren Y
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Jan; 145(1):108-15. PubMed ID: 24373661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. Comparison of linear measurements and analyses taken from plaster models and three-dimensional images.
Porto BG; Porto TS; Silva MB; Grehs RA; Pinto Ados S; Bhandi SH; Tonetto MR; Bandéca MC; dos Santos-Pinto LA
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2014 Nov; 15(6):681-7. PubMed ID: 25825090
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Reliability and accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography dental measurements.
Baumgaertel S; Palomo JM; Palomo L; Hans MG
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):19-25; discussion 25-8. PubMed ID: 19577143
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy.
Keating AP; Knox J; Bibb R; Zhurov AI
J Orthod; 2008 Sep; 35(3):191-201; discussion 175. PubMed ID: 18809782
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Computer aided analysis of digitized dental stone replicas by dental CAD/CAM technology.
Persson AS; Andersson M; Odén A; Sandborgh-Englund G
Dent Mater; 2008 Aug; 24(8):1123-30. PubMed ID: 18336900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Analysis of intra-arch and interarch measurements from digital models with 2 impression materials and a modeling process based on cone-beam computed tomography.
White AJ; Fallis DW; Vandewalle KS
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 Apr; 137(4):456.e1-9; discussion 456-7. PubMed ID: 20362900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Predicting tooth-size discrepancy: A new formula utilizing revised landmarks and 3-dimensional laser scanning technology.
Bailey E; Nelson G; Miller AJ; Andrews L; Johnson E
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Apr; 143(4):574-85. PubMed ID: 23561420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Digitization of simulated clinical dental impressions: virtual three-dimensional analysis of exactness.
Persson AS; Odén A; Andersson M; Sandborgh-Englund G
Dent Mater; 2009 Jul; 25(7):929-36. PubMed ID: 19264353
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Accuracy, reproducibility, and time efficiency of dental measurements using different technologies.
Grünheid T; Patel N; De Felippe NL; Wey A; Gaillard PR; Larson BE
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Feb; 145(2):157-64. PubMed ID: 24485729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Tooth size and dental arch dimensions: a stereophotogrammetric study in Southeast Asian Malays.
Al-Khatib AR; Rajion ZA; Masudi SM; Hassan R; Anderson PJ; Townsend GC
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2011 Nov; 14(4):243-53. PubMed ID: 22008304
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision.
Ender A; Mehl A
J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Feb; 109(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23395338
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Reliability and validity of intraoral and extraoral scanners.
Jacob HB; Wyatt GD; Buschang PH
Prog Orthod; 2015; 16():38. PubMed ID: 26506832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Reproducibility and accuracy of linear measurements on dental models derived from cone-beam computed tomography compared with digital dental casts.
de Waard O; Rangel FA; Fudalej PS; Bronkhorst EM; Kuijpers-Jagtman AM; Breuning KH
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Sep; 146(3):328-36. PubMed ID: 25172255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
