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 *

105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2489334)

  • 1. [Study of automatic cephalometric analysis by digital image processing].
    Maizumi I
    Shigaku; 1989 Oct; 77(3):822-38. PubMed ID: 2489334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of speed, repeatability, and reproducibility of digital radiography with manual versus computer-assisted cephalometric analyses.
    Uysal T; Baysal A; Yagci A
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Oct; 31(5):523-8. PubMed ID: 19443692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of landmark identification in traditional versus computer-aided digital cephalometry.
    Chen YJ; Chen SK; Chang HF; Chen KC
    Angle Orthod; 2000 Oct; 70(5):387-92. PubMed ID: 11036999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of cephalometric measurements with digital versus conventional cephalometric analysis.
    Celik E; Polat-Ozsoy O; Toygar Memikoglu TU
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Jun; 31(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 19237509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings.
    Sayinsu K; Isik F; Trakyali G; Arun T
    Eur J Orthod; 2007 Feb; 29(1):105-8. PubMed ID: 17290023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of computerized automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks.
    Liu JK; Chen YT; Cheng KS
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2000 Nov; 118(5):535-40. PubMed ID: 11094367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of the reproducibility of manual tracing and on-screen digitization for cephalometric profile variables.
    Dvortsin DP; Sandham A; Pruim GJ; Dijkstra PU
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Dec; 30(6):586-91. PubMed ID: 18719051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effects of differences in landmark identification on the cephalometric measurements in traditional versus digitized cephalometry.
    Chen YJ; Chen SK; Yao JC; Chang HF
    Angle Orthod; 2004 Apr; 74(2):155-61. PubMed ID: 15132440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The accuracy of cephalometric tracing superimposition.
    Gliddon MJ; Xia JJ; Gateno J; Wong HT; Lasky RE; Teichgraeber JF; Jia X; Liebschner MA; Lemoine JJ
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2006 Feb; 64(2):194-202. PubMed ID: 16413890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Differences in cephalometric measurements: a comparison of digital versus hand-tracing methods.
    Polat-Ozsoy O; Gokcelik A; Toygar Memikoglu TU
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Jun; 31(3):254-9. PubMed ID: 19349417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accuracy of cephalometric landmarks on monitor-displayed radiographs with and without image emboss enhancement.
    Leonardi RM; Giordano D; Maiorana F; Greco M
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Jun; 32(3):242-7. PubMed ID: 20022892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Fully Automatic System for Accurate Localisation and Analysis of Cephalometric Landmarks in Lateral Cephalograms.
    Lindner C; Wang CW; Huang CT; Li CH; Chang SW; Cootes TF
    Sci Rep; 2016 Sep; 6():33581. PubMed ID: 27645567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Reproducibility of measurements in tablet-assisted, PC-aided, and manual cephalometric analysis.
    Goracci C; Ferrari M
    Angle Orthod; 2014 May; 84(3):437-42. PubMed ID: 24160993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of digital and analogue cephalometric measurements assessed with the sandwich technique.
    Santoro M; Jarjoura K; Cangialosi TJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Mar; 129(3):345-51. PubMed ID: 16527629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of hand-tracing and cephalometric analysis computer programs with and without advanced features--accuracy and time demands.
    Tsorovas G; Karsten AL
    Eur J Orthod; 2010 Dec; 32(6):721-8. PubMed ID: 20554891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of scanned lateral cephalograms with corresponding original radiographs.
    Bruntz LQ; Palomo JM; Baden S; Hans MG
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 Sep; 130(3):340-8. PubMed ID: 16979492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Reliability of computer-generated cephalometrics.
    Nimkarn Y; Miles PG
    Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg; 1995; 10(1):43-52. PubMed ID: 9081992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Reliability of landmark identification in cephalometric radiography acquired by a storage phosphor imaging system.
    Chen YJ; Chen SK; Huang HW; Yao CC; Chang HF
    Dentomaxillofac Radiol; 2004 Sep; 33(5):301-6. PubMed ID: 15585806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. A comparison of manual traced images and corresponding scanned radiographs digitally traced.
    Naoumova J; Lindman R
    Eur J Orthod; 2009 Jun; 31(3):247-53. PubMed ID: 19342425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of hand-traced and computerized cephalograms: landmark identification, measurement, and superimposition accuracy.
    Roden-Johnson D; English J; Gallerano R
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Apr; 133(4):556-64. PubMed ID: 18405820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.