176 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26506832)
1. 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]
2. Accuracy of four different digital intraoral scanners: effects of the presence of orthodontic brackets and wire.
Jung YR; Park JM; Chun YS; Lee KN; Kim M
Int J Comput Dent; 2016; 19(3):203-15. PubMed ID: 27644178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Accuracy of 3-dimensional curvilinear measurements on digital models with intraoral scanners.
Mack S; Bonilla T; English JD; Cozad B; Akyalcin S
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2017 Sep; 152(3):420-425. PubMed ID: 28863923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. An experimental study of arch perimeter and arch width increase with mandibular expansion: a finite element method.
Baswaraj ; Hemanth M; Jayasudha ; Patil C; Sunilkumar P; Raghuveer HP; Chandralekha B
J Contemp Dent Pract; 2013 Jan; 14(1):104-10. PubMed ID: 23579904
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of dental and basal arch forms using cone-beam CT and 3D virtual models of normal occlusion.
Bayome M; Park JH; Han SH; Baek SH; Sameshima GT; Kook YA
Aust Orthod J; 2013 May; 29(1):43-51. PubMed ID: 23785937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Three-dimensional assessment of teeth first-, second- and third-order position in Caucasian and African subjects with ideal occlusion.
Lombardo L; Perri A; Arreghini A; Latini M; Siciliani G
Prog Orthod; 2015; 16():11. PubMed ID: 26061990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The validity, reliability, and time requirement of study model analysis using cone-beam computed tomography-generated virtual study models.
Luu NS; Mandich MA; Flores-Mir C; El-Bialy T; Heo G; Carey JP; Major PW
Orthod Craniofac Res; 2014 Feb; 17(1):14-26. PubMed ID: 23590668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Subjective classification and objective analysis of the mandibular dental-arch form of orthodontic patients.
Arai K; Will LA
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2011 Apr; 139(4):e315-21. PubMed ID: 21457837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Validity and reliability of tooth size and dental arch measurements: a stereo photogrammetric study.
Al-Khatib AR; Rajion ZA; Masudi SM; Hassan R; Townsend GC
Aust Orthod J; 2012 May; 28(1):22-9. PubMed ID: 22866590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reliability of linear and angular dental measurements with the OrthoMechanics Sequential Analyzer.
Talaat S; Kaboudan A; Breuning H; Ragy N; Elshebiny T; Kula K; Ghoneima A
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2015 Feb; 147(2):264-9. PubMed ID: 25636561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with the iTero and a model scanner.
Flügge TV; Schlager S; Nelson K; Nahles S; Metzger MC
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Sep; 144(3):471-8. PubMed ID: 23992820
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
