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 *

186 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24763173)

  • 21. Evaluation of the Jones jig appliance for distal molar movement.
    Brickman CD; Sinha PK; Nanda RS
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Nov; 118(5):526-34. PubMed ID: 11094366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Moderate quality evidence that surgical anchorage more effective than conventional anchorage during orthodontic treatment.
    Reynders RM; de Lange J
    Evid Based Dent; 2014 Dec; 15(4):108-9. PubMed ID: 25522941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effectiveness of 3 methods of anchorage reinforcement for maximum anchorage in adolescents: A 3-arm multicenter randomized clinical trial.
    Sandler J; Murray A; Thiruvenkatachari B; Gutierrez R; Speight P; O'Brien K
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Jul; 146(1):10-20. PubMed ID: 24974994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Evidence regarding lingual fixed orthodontic appliances' therapeutic and adverse effects is insufficient.
    Afrashtehfar KI
    Evid Based Dent; 2016 Jun; 17(2):54-5. PubMed ID: 27339241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children.
    Millett DT; Cunningham SJ; O'Brien KD; Benson P; Williams A; de Oliveira CM
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2006 Oct; (4):CD005972. PubMed ID: 17054268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Intraoral maxillary molar distalization.
    Karlsson I; Bondemark L
    Angle Orthod; 2006 Nov; 76(6):923-9. PubMed ID: 17090171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Molar distalization with pendulum appliances in the mixed dentition: effects on the position of unerupted canines and premolars.
    Kinzinger GS; Wehrbein H; Gross U; Diedrich PR
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Mar; 129(3):407-17. PubMed ID: 16527638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Are interventions for accelerating orthodontic tooth movement effective?
    Abdallah MN; Flores-Mir C
    Evid Based Dent; 2014 Dec; 15(4):116-7. PubMed ID: 25522945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.
    Yao CC; Lai EH; Chang JZ; Chen I; Chen YJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Nov; 134(5):615-24. PubMed ID: 18984393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A comparative analysis of maxillary tooth movement produced by cervical headgear and pend-x appliance.
    Taner TU; Yukay F; Pehlivanoglu M; Cakirer B
    Angle Orthod; 2003 Dec; 73(6):686-91. PubMed ID: 14719733
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. No reliable evidence to guide initial arch wire choice for fixed appliance therapy.
    Flores-Mir C
    Evid Based Dent; 2013 Dec; 14(4):114-5. PubMed ID: 24357824
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Is anchorage reinforcement with implants effective in orthodontics?
    Kalha AS
    Evid Based Dent; 2008; 9(1):13-4. PubMed ID: 18364687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating intraoral orthopedic appliances for temporomandibular disorders.
    Fricton J; Look JO; Wright E; Alencar FG; Chen H; Lang M; Ouyang W; Velly AM
    J Orofac Pain; 2010; 24(3):237-54. PubMed ID: 20664825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. [A comparative study of clinical application of two types appliances for maxillary molar distalization].
    Wang Z; Huang C; Zhou H; Liu Z
    Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2001 Oct; 19(5):309-11. PubMed ID: 12539488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Orthodontic retention to have and to hold.
    Kalha AS
    Evid Based Dent; 2016 Dec; 17(4):105-106. PubMed ID: 27980334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Unclear if non-surgical adjuncts accelerate orthodontic treatment.
    Elkhadem A; Sheba M
    Evid Based Dent; 2017 Mar; 18(1):26-27. PubMed ID: 28338029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Fixed or removable function appliances for Class II malocclusions.
    Madurantakam P
    Evid Based Dent; 2016 Jun; 17(2):52-3. PubMed ID: 27339240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Early orthodontic treatment for Class III malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Woon SC; Thiruvenkatachari B
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Jan; 151(1):28-52. PubMed ID: 28024779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Noncompliance maxillary molar distalization with the first class appliance: a randomized controlled trial.
    Papadopoulos MA; Melkos AB; Athanasiou AE
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2010 May; 137(5):586.e1-586.e13; discussion 586-7. PubMed ID: 20451774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Anchorage provided during intra-arch distal molar movement: a comparison between the Nance appliance and a fixed frontal bite plane.
    Bondemark L; Thornéus J
    Angle Orthod; 2005 May; 75(3):437-43. PubMed ID: 15898386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.