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 *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2723096)

  • 1. Inter- and intra-examiner variability using standard and constant force periodontal probes.
    Walsh TF; Saxby MS
    J Clin Periodontol; 1989 Mar; 16(3):140-3. PubMed ID: 2723096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of measurement variability in subjects with moderate periodontitis using a conventional and constant force periodontal probe.
    Osborn JB; Stoltenberg JL; Huso BA; Aeppli DM; Pihlstrom BL
    J Periodontol; 1992 Apr; 63(4):283-9. PubMed ID: 1573541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparison of measurement variability using a standard and constant force periodontal probe.
    Osborn J; Stoltenberg J; Huso B; Aeppli D; Pihlstrom B
    J Periodontol; 1990 Aug; 61(8):497-503. PubMed ID: 2391627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Intra - and inter-examiner reproducibility in constant force probing.
    Wang SF; Leknes KN; Zimmerman GJ; Sigurdsson TJ; Wikesjö UM; Selvig KA
    J Clin Periodontol; 1995 Dec; 22(12):918-22. PubMed ID: 8613559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Periodontal probe precision using 4 different periodontal probes.
    Mayfield L; Bratthall G; Attström R
    J Clin Periodontol; 1996 Feb; 23(2):76-82. PubMed ID: 8849842
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Constant force probing with and without a stent in untreated periodontal disease: the clinical reproducibility problem and possible sources of error.
    Watts T
    J Clin Periodontol; 1987 Aug; 14(7):407-11. PubMed ID: 3476518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A comparison of manual and controlled-force attachment-level measurements.
    Reddy MS; Palcanis KG; Geurs NC
    J Clin Periodontol; 1997 Dec; 24(12):920-6. PubMed ID: 9442430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Clinical evaluation of electronic and manual constant force probes.
    Khocht A; Chang KM
    J Periodontol; 1998 Jan; 69(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 9527557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of manual and automated probing in an untreated periodontitis population.
    Oringer RJ; Fiorellini JP; Koch GG; Sharp TJ; Nevins ML; Davis GH; Howell TH
    J Periodontol; 1997 Dec; 68(12):1156-62. PubMed ID: 9444589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Correlation between electronic and visual readings of pocket depths with a newly developed constant force probe.
    Magnusson I; Fuller WW; Heins PJ; Rau CF; Gibbs CH; Marks RG; Clark WB
    J Clin Periodontol; 1988 Mar; 15(3):180-4. PubMed ID: 3162464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Important differences in clinical data from third, second, and first generation periodontal probes.
    Breen HJ; Rogers PA; Lawless HC; Austin JS; Johnson NW
    J Periodontol; 1997 Apr; 68(4):335-45. PubMed ID: 9150038
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A clinical study of an electronic constant force periodontal probe.
    Tupta-Veselicky L; Famili P; Ceravolo FJ; Zullo T
    J Periodontol; 1994 Jun; 65(6):616-22. PubMed ID: 8083795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Site-specific attachment level change detected by physical probing in untreated chronic adult periodontitis: review of studies 1982-1997.
    Breen HJ; Johnson NW; Rogers PA
    J Periodontol; 1999 Mar; 70(3):312-28. PubMed ID: 10225549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Clinical evaluation of a constant force electronic probe.
    Quirynen M; Callens A; van Steenberghe D; Nys M
    J Periodontol; 1993 Jan; 64(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 8426288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Reproducibility of attachment level measurements with two models of the Florida Probe.
    Marks RG; Low SB; Taylor M; Baggs R; Magnusson I; Clark WB
    J Clin Periodontol; 1991 Nov; 18(10):780-4. PubMed ID: 1753003
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Measurement of clinical attachment levels using a constant-force periodontal probe modified to detect the cemento-enamel junction.
    Preshaw PM; Kupp L; Hefti AF; Mariotti A
    J Clin Periodontol; 1999 Jul; 26(7):434-40. PubMed ID: 10412847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Inter-examiner reproducibility of probing pocket depths in molar furcation sites.
    Moriarty JD; Scheitler LE; Hutchens LH; Delong ER
    J Clin Periodontol; 1988 Jan; 15(1):68-72. PubMed ID: 3422247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparison of manual and pressure-controlled periodontal probing.
    Kalkwarf KL; Kaldahl WB; Patil KD
    J Periodontol; 1986 Aug; 57(8):467-71. PubMed ID: 3528451
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sources of error for periodontal probing measurements.
    Grossi SG; Dunford RG; Ho A; Koch G; Machtei EE; Genco RJ
    J Periodontal Res; 1996 Jul; 31(5):330-6. PubMed ID: 8858537
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Accuracy of probing attachment levels using a CEJ probe versus traditional probes.
    Karpinia K; Magnusson I; Gibbs C; Yang MC
    J Clin Periodontol; 2004 Mar; 31(3):173-6. PubMed ID: 15016020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.