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 *

154 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28630957)

  • 1. Optical profilometry versus intraoral (handheld) scanning.
    Hartkamp O; Peters F; Bothung H; Lohbauer U; Reich S
    Int J Comput Dent; 2017; 20(2):165-176. PubMed ID: 28630957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Accuracy of two best-fit alignment strategies with different reference areas for wear measurement with an intraoral scanner: an in vitro study.
    Li R; Zhang R; Zhou Y; Peng J
    Int J Comput Dent; 2023 Nov; 26(4):331-337. PubMed ID: 36749282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Finish line distinctness and accuracy in 7 intraoral scanners versus conventional impression: an in vitro descriptive comparison.
    Nedelcu R; Olsson P; Nyström I; Thor A
    BMC Oral Health; 2018 Feb; 18(1):27. PubMed ID: 29471825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Monitoring of Erosive Tooth Wear with Intraoral Scanners In vitro.
    Witecy C; Ganss C; Wöstmann B; Schlenz MB; Schlenz MA
    Caries Res; 2021; 55(3):215-224. PubMed ID: 33752205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners: A Systematic Review of Influencing Factors.
    Abduo J; Elseyoufi M
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2018 Aug; 26(3):101-121. PubMed ID: 29989757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study.
    Imburgia M; Logozzo S; Hauschild U; Veronesi G; Mangano C; Mangano FG
    BMC Oral Health; 2017 Jun; 17(1):92. PubMed ID: 28577366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: A novel in vivo analysis method.
    Nedelcu R; Olsson P; Nyström I; Rydén J; Thor A
    J Dent; 2018 Feb; 69():110-118. PubMed ID: 29246490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Influence of Scanner Precision and Analysis Software in Quantifying Three-Dimensional Intraoral Changes: Two-Factor Factorial Experimental Design.
    O'Toole S; Bartlett D; Keeling A; McBride J; Bernabe E; Crins L; Loomans B
    J Med Internet Res; 2020 Nov; 22(11):e17150. PubMed ID: 33245280
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Accuracy of computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing-generated dental casts based on intraoral scanner data.
    Patzelt SB; Bishti S; Stampf S; Att W
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2014 Nov; 145(11):1133-40. PubMed ID: 25359645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization.
    Güth JF; Runkel C; Beuer F; Stimmelmayr M; Edelhoff D; Keul C
    Clin Oral Investig; 2017 Jun; 21(5):1445-1455. PubMed ID: 27406138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Three-dimensional differences between intraoral scans and conventional impressions of edentulous jaws: A clinical study.
    Lo Russo L; Caradonna G; Troiano G; Salamini A; Guida L; Ciavarella D
    J Prosthet Dent; 2020 Feb; 123(2):264-268. PubMed ID: 31153614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Influence of Tooth Preparation Design and Scan Angulations on the Accuracy of Two Intraoral Digital Scanners: An in Vitro Study Based on 3-Dimensional Comparisons.
    Ammoun R; Suprono MS; Goodacre CJ; Oyoyo U; Carrico CK; Kattadiyil MT
    J Prosthodont; 2020 Mar; 29(3):201-206. PubMed ID: 31994818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Accuracy of digital models generated by conventional impression/plaster-model methods and intraoral scanning.
    Tomita Y; Uechi J; Konno M; Sasamoto S; Iijima M; Mizoguchi I
    Dent Mater J; 2018 Jul; 37(4):628-633. PubMed ID: 29669951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of complete- and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro.
    Ender A; Zimmermann M; Mehl A
    Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(1):11-19. PubMed ID: 30848250
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparing the trueness of seven intraoral scanners and a physical impression on dentate human maxilla by a novel method.
    Nagy Z; Simon B; Mennito A; Evans Z; Renne W; Vág J
    BMC Oral Health; 2020 Apr; 20(1):97. PubMed ID: 32264943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Accuracy of Intraoral Scanning of Edentulous Jaws with and without Resin Markers.
    Tao C; Zhao YJ; Sun YC; Heng MD; Xie QF; Pan SX
    Chin J Dent Res; 2020; 23(4):265-271. PubMed ID: 33491358
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Impact of different scanning strategies on the accuracy of two current intraoral scanning systems in complete-arch impressions: an in vitro study.
    Passos L; Meiga S; Brigagão V; Street A
    Int J Comput Dent; 2019; 22(4):307-319. PubMed ID: 31840139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Local accuracy of actual intraoral scanning systems for single-tooth preparations in vitro.
    Zimmermann M; Ender A; Mehl A
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2020 Feb; 151(2):127-135. PubMed ID: 31883705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Progress in digital dentistry: The practical use of intraoral scanners.
    Suese K
    Dent Mater J; 2020 Jan; 39(1):52-56. PubMed ID: 31723066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Use of an intraoral scanner to evaluate oral health.
    Doi K; Yoshiga C; Kobatake R; Kawagoe M; Wakamatsu K; Tsuga K
    J Oral Sci; 2021 Jun; 63(3):292-294. PubMed ID: 34108300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.