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 *

124 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24987638)

  • 21. Changes in natural head position after orthognathic surgery in skeletal Class III patients.
    Cho D; Choi DS; Jang I; Cha BK
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Jun; 147(6):747-54. PubMed ID: 26038079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. To Check the Reliability of Various Cephalometric Parameters used for Predicting the Type of Malocclusions and Growth Patterns.
    Pawar RO; Mane DR; Patil CD; Bhalerao SV; Parkar AF; Agarwal S
    J Pharm Bioallied Sci; 2022 Jul; 14(Suppl 1):S808-S811. PubMed ID: 36110773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effects of modified twin block appliance in growing Class II high angle cases: A cephalometric study.
    Jha K; Adhikari M
    F1000Res; 2022; 11():459. PubMed ID: 38680231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Cephalometric study to test the reliability of anteroposterior skeletal discrepancy indicators using the twin block appliance.
    Trivedi R; Bhattacharya A; Mehta F; Patel D; Parekh H; Gandhi V
    Prog Orthod; 2015 Feb; 16():3. PubMed ID: 25769138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Tau Angle: A New Approach for Assessment of True Sagittal Maxillomandibular Relationship.
    Gupta P; Singh N; Tripathi T; Gopal R; Rai P
    Int J Clin Pediatr Dent; 2020; 13(5):497-500. PubMed ID: 33623336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of relationship between cranial base angle and maxillofacial morphology in Indian population: A cephalometric study.
    Bhattacharya A; Bhatia A; Patel D; Mehta N; Parekh H; Trivedi R
    J Orthod Sci; 2014 Jul; 3(3):74-80. PubMed ID: 25143931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Comparison of popular sagittal cephalometric analyses for validity and reliability.
    Qamaruddin I; Alam MK; Shahid F; Tanveer S; Umer M; Amin E
    Saudi Dent J; 2018 Jan; 30(1):43-46. PubMed ID: 30166870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Relationships of sagittal skeletal discrepancy, natural head position, and craniocervical posture in young Chinese children.
    Liu Y; Sun X; Chen Y; Hu M; Hou X; Liu C
    Cranio; 2016 May; 34(3):155-62. PubMed ID: 26039882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Correlation between dental arch width and sagittal dento-skeletal morphology in untreated adults.
    Shahroudi AS; Etezadi T
    J Dent (Tehran); 2013 Nov; 10(6):522-31. PubMed ID: 24910663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Photographic Frankfort plane subnasale pogonion (FSA) angle for assessment of anteroposterior discrepancies in malocclusion subjects: A prospective study.
    Rebekah R; Jain RK; Balasubramaniam A; Sreenivasagan S
    J Orthod Sci; 2023; 12():57. PubMed ID: 37881674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of the Stability After Mandibular Setback With Minimal Orthodontics of Class III Patients With Different Facial Types.
    Lee YS; Kim YK; Yun PY; Larson BE; Lee NK
    J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2016 Jul; 74(7):1464.e1-1464.e10. PubMed ID: 27060493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Assessment of Palatal Plane and Occlusal Plane for Determining Anteroposterior Jaw Relation.
    Pyakurel U; Thapaliya KB; Singh K; Gupta A; Gupta S; Bajracharya M; Shrestha RM; Mishra P
    JNMA J Nepal Med Assoc; 2019; 57(215):3-7. PubMed ID: 31080237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Overjet as a predictor of sagittal skeletal relationships.
    Zupancic S; Pohar M; Farcnik F; Ovsenik M
    Eur J Orthod; 2008 Jun; 30(3):269-73. PubMed ID: 18540015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Cephalometric and in vivo measurements of maxillomandibular anteroposterior discrepancies: a preliminary regression study.
    Ferrario VF; Serrao G; Ciusa V; Morini M; Sforza C
    Angle Orthod; 2002 Dec; 72(6):579-84. PubMed ID: 12518952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. [Effect of premolars scissor bite on the sagittal position of mandible].
    Li J; Lu SJ; Shi YJ; Lu P; Tian YL
    Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue; 2019 Aprial; 28(2):179-183. PubMed ID: 31384905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Correlation of Beta Angle with Antero-Posterior Dysplasia Indicators and FMA: An Institution Based Cephalometric Study.
    Singh G; Verma S; Singh DP; Yadav SK; Yadav AB
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2016 Nov; 10(11):ZC75-ZC78. PubMed ID: 28050509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Association between quality of life and severity of profile deviation in prospective orthognathic patients.
    Kämäräinen M; Alanko O; Svedström-Oristo AL; Peltomäki T
    Eur J Orthod; 2020 Jun; 42(3):290-294. PubMed ID: 31880302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. A comparison of cephalometric analyses for assessing sagittal jaw relationship.
    Gul-e-Erum ; Fida M
    J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2008 Nov; 18(11):679-83. PubMed ID: 18983790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Why WITS? Why not a way beyond?
    Nagar S; Nagar R; Raghav P
    Contemp Clin Dent; 2014 Oct; 5(4):518-23. PubMed ID: 25395770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The Correlation of a Novel Photographic Parameter for Facial Profile Assessment in Subjects With Different Sagittal Malocclusions: A Prospective Study.
    Sankaranarayanan RR; Jain RK
    Cureus; 2023 Sep; 15(9):e44553. PubMed ID: 37790048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.