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 *

116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29624856)

  • 1. A cross-sectional analysis of Wits and Riedel in adults with skeletal III malocclusion: How informative are they?
    Oliver GR; Grimes K; Pandis N; Fleming PS
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2018 Apr; ():. PubMed ID: 29624856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Correlation of Dental and Skeletal Malocclusions in Sagittal Plane among Saudi Orthodontic Patients.
    Al-Hamlan N; Al-Eissa B; Al-Hiyasat AS; Albalawi FS; Ahmed AE
    J Contemp Dent Pract; 2015 May; 16(5):353-9. PubMed ID: 26162253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Floating norms for individualising the ANB angle and the WITS appraisal in orthodontic cephalometric analysis based on guiding variables.
    Paddenberg E; Proff P; Kirschneck C
    J Orofac Orthop; 2023 Jan; 84(1):10-18. PubMed ID: 34255093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Accuracy of different cephalometric analyses in the diagnosis of class III malocclusion in Saudi and Yemeni population.
    Alassiry AM
    J Orthod Sci; 2020; 9():14. PubMed ID: 33354540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The wits appraisal using three reference planes and its interaction with the ANB angle among a sub-set of Nigerians".
    Ifesanya JU; Adeyemi AT; Otuyemi OD
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 2014 Sep; 43(3):225-30. PubMed ID: 26223140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Influence of the facial pattern on ANB, AF-BF, and Wits appraisal.
    Tanaka JL; Ono E; Filho Medici E; Cesar de Moraes L; Cezar de Melo Castilho J; Leonelli de Moraes ME
    World J Orthod; 2006; 7(4):369-75. PubMed ID: 17190230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Predictability and Reliability of Different Anterio-Posterior Skeletal Discrepancy Indicators in Different Age Groups - A Cephalometric Study.
    Tiwari R; Shyagali TR; Gupta A; Joshi R; Tiwari A; Sen P
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2016 Sep; 10(9):ZC80-ZC84. PubMed ID: 27790586
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Properties of the ANB angle and the Wits appraisal in the skeletal estimation of Angle's Class III patients.
    Iwasaki H; Ishikawa H; Chowdhury L; Nakamura S; Iida J
    Eur J Orthod; 2002 Oct; 24(5):477-83. PubMed ID: 12407943
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparative assessment of sagittal skeletal discrepancy: a cephalometric study.
    Aparna P; Kumar DN; Prasad M; Shamnur N; G AK; K R S; B R GK; Gupta N
    J Clin Diagn Res; 2015 Apr; 9(4):ZC38-41. PubMed ID: 26023641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 3D cephalometry on reduced FOV CBCT: skeletal class assessment through AF-BF on Frankfurt plane-validity and reliability through comparison with 2D measurements.
    Farronato M; Maspero C; Abate A; Grippaudo C; Connelly ST; Tartaglia GM
    Eur Radiol; 2020 Nov; 30(11):6295-6302. PubMed ID: 32382843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Relation of the Wits appraisal to the ANB angle: a statistical appraisal.
    Järvinen S
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1988 Nov; 94(5):432-5. PubMed ID: 3189246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Study between anb angle and Wits appraisal in cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).
    Zamora N; Cibrián R; Gandia JL; Paredes V
    Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal; 2013 Jul; 18(4):e725-32. PubMed ID: 23722136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of functional versus bisected occlusal planes on the Wits appraisal.
    Thayer TA
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 1990 May; 97(5):422-6. PubMed ID: 2333856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Analysis of factors affecting angle ANB.
    Hussels W; Nanda RS
    Am J Orthod; 1984 May; 85(5):411-23. PubMed ID: 6586080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The use of linear and angular measurements of maxillo-mandibular anteroposterior discrepancies.
    Ferrario VF; Sforza C; Miani A; Tartaglia GM
    Clin Orthod Res; 1999 Feb; 2(1):34-41. PubMed ID: 10534977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Influence of occlusal plane inclination on ANB and Wits assessments of anteroposterior jaw relationships.
    Del Santo M
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2006 May; 129(5):641-8. PubMed ID: 16679204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Orthodontic camouflage versus orthognathic surgery for class III deformity: comparative cephalometric analysis.
    Martinez P; Bellot-Arcís C; Llamas JM; Cibrian R; Gandia JL; Paredes-Gallardo V
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2017 Apr; 46(4):490-495. PubMed ID: 28034574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Diagnostic validity of different cephalometric analyses for assessment of the sagittal skeletal pattern.
    Ahmed M; Shaikh A; Fida M
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2018; 23(5):75-81. PubMed ID: 30427496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Relationship between skeletal Class II and Class III malocclusions with vertical skeletal pattern.
    Plaza SP; Reimpell A; Silva J; Montoya D
    Dental Press J Orthod; 2019 Sep; 24(4):63-72. PubMed ID: 31508708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Cephalometric changes in pharyngeal airway dimensions after functional treatment with twin block versus myobrace appliances in developing skeletal class II patients: a randomized clinical trial.
    Madian AM; Elfouly D
    BMC Oral Health; 2023 Dec; 23(1):998. PubMed ID: 38093237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.