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 *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28738248)

  • 1. The reliability and validity of measurements of human dental casts made by an intra-oral 3D scanner, with conventional hand-held digital callipers as the comparison measure.
    Rajshekar M; Julian R; Williams AM; Tennant M; Forrest A; Walsh LJ; Wilson G; Blizzard L
    Forensic Sci Int; 2017 Sep; 278():198-204. PubMed ID: 28738248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Can the intra-examiner variability of Little's Irregularity Index be improved using 3D digital models of study casts?
    Dowling AH; Burns A; Macauley D; Garvey TM; Fleming GJ
    J Dent; 2013 Dec; 41(12):1271-80. PubMed ID: 24012518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. The accuracy of a 3-D laser scanner for crown width measurements.
    Nouri M; Massudi R; Bagheban AA; Azimi S; Fereidooni F
    Aust Orthod J; 2009 May; 25(1):41-7. PubMed ID: 19634463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A clinical photogrammetric method to measure dental arch dimensions and mesio-distal tooth size.
    Normando D; da Silva PL; Mendes ÁM
    Eur J Orthod; 2011 Dec; 33(6):721-6. PubMed ID: 21282283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions.
    Wiranto MG; Engelbrecht WP; Tutein Nolthenius HE; van der Meer WJ; Ren Y
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Jan; 143(1):140-7. PubMed ID: 23273370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts.
    Leifert MF; Leifert MM; Efstratiadis SS; Cangialosi TJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2009 Jul; 136(1):16.e1-4; discussion 16. PubMed ID: 19577140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios.
    Naidu D; Freer TJ
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2013 Aug; 144(2):304-10. PubMed ID: 23910212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Validity, reliability and reproducibility of three methods used to measure tooth widths for bolton analyses.
    Naidu D; Scott J; Ong D; Ho CT
    Aust Orthod J; 2009 Nov; 25(2):97-103. PubMed ID: 20043542
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison between five commonly used two-dimensional methods of human bite mark overlay production from the dental study casts.
    Maloth S; Ganapathy KS
    Indian J Dent Res; 2011; 22(3):493. PubMed ID: 22048597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of tip and torque on virtual study models: a validation study.
    Huanca Ghislanzoni LT; Lineberger M; Cevidanes LH; Mapelli A; Sforza C; McNamara JA
    Prog Orthod; 2013 Jul; 14():19. PubMed ID: 24325839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [The comparison analysis of the line measurements between plaster and virtual orthodontic 3D models].
    Jedlińska A
    Ann Acad Med Stetin; 2008; 54(2):106-13. PubMed ID: 19374240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Tooth-size discrepancy: a comparison between manual and digital methods.
    Correia GD; Habib FA; Vogel CJ
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2014; 19(4):107-13. PubMed ID: 25279529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison between a new 2-dimensional digital on-screen tooth measurement method with direct measurements.
    Sonbol HN; Al-Omari IK; Duaibis RB; Saleh MW; Al-Bitar ZB
    Saudi Med J; 2011 Sep; 32(9):895-900. PubMed ID: 21894350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy and validity of space analysis and irregularity index measurements using digital models.
    Goonewardene RW; Goonewardene MS; Razza JM; Murray K
    Aust Orthod J; 2008 Nov; 24(2):83-90. PubMed ID: 19113071
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision.
    Ender A; Mehl A
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Feb; 109(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23395338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A new system for scanning, measuring and analyzing dental casts based on a 3D holographic sensor.
    Redlich M; Weinstock T; Abed Y; Schneor R; Holdstein Y; Fischer A
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2008 May; 11(2):90-5. PubMed ID: 18416750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: a validation study.
    Cuperus AM; Harms MC; Rangel FA; Bronkhorst EM; Schols JG; Breuning KH
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2012 Sep; 142(3):308-13. PubMed ID: 22920696
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models.
    Zilberman O; Huggare JA; Parikakis KA
    Angle Orthod; 2003 Jun; 73(3):301-6. PubMed ID: 12828439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.