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 *

171 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30024348)

  • 21. Comparison of two intraoral scanners based on three-dimensional surface analysis.
    Lee KM
    Prog Orthod; 2018 Feb; 19(1):6. PubMed ID: 29430612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Accuracy of Intraoral Digital Impressions for Whole Upper Jaws, Including Full Dentitions and Palatal Soft Tissues.
    Gan N; Xiong Y; Jiao T
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(7):e0158800. PubMed ID: 27383409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Feasibility of using an intraoral scanner for a complete-arch digital scan.
    Park GH; Son K; Lee KB
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 May; 121(5):803-810. PubMed ID: 30598314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Bias Evaluation of the Accuracy of Two Extraoral Scanners and an Intraoral Scanner Based on ADA Standards.
    Cui N; Wang J; Hou X; Sun S; Huang Q; Lim HK; Cai H; Jia Q; Lee ES; Jiang HB
    Scanning; 2021; 2021():5535403. PubMed ID: 34221213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. Precision of Dental Implant Digitization Using Intraoral Scanners.
    Flügge TV; Att W; Metzger MC; Nelson K
    Int J Prosthodont; 2016; 29(3):277-83. PubMed ID: 27148990
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Comparison of repeatability between intraoral digital scanner and extraoral digital scanner: An in-vitro study.
    Su TS; Sun J
    J Prosthodont Res; 2015 Oct; 59(4):236-42. PubMed ID: 26211702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Accuracy of intraoral and extraoral digital data acquisition for dental restorations.
    Rudolph H; Salmen H; Moldan M; Kuhn K; Sichwardt V; Wöstmann B; Luthardt RG
    J Appl Oral Sci; 2016; 24(1):85-94. PubMed ID: 27008261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Assessing the feasibility and accuracy of digitizing edentulous jaws.
    Patzelt SB; Vonau S; Stampf S; Att W
    J Am Dent Assoc; 2013 Aug; 144(8):914-20. PubMed ID: 23904578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal laser technology for implants with consideration of operator experience and implant angulation and depth.
    Giménez B; Özcan M; Martínez-Rus F; Pradíes G
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2014; 29(4):853-62. PubMed ID: 25032765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Accuracy of two digital implant impression systems based on confocal microscopy with variations in customized software and clinical parameters.
    Giménez B; Pradíes G; Martínez-Rus F; Özcan M
    Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants; 2015; 30(1):56-64. PubMed ID: 25615916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. A Technique for Digital Impression and Bite Registration for a Single Edentulous Arch.
    Fang Y; Fang JH; Jeong SM; Choi BH
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):e519-e523. PubMed ID: 29522269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Three-Dimensional Static Articulation Accuracy of Virtual Models - Part I: System Trueness and Precision.
    Yee SHX; Esguerra RJ; Chew AAQ; Wong KM; Tan KBC
    J Prosthodont; 2018 Feb; 27(2):129-136. PubMed ID: 29235202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Validity and reliability of intraoral scanners compared to conventional gypsum models measurements: a systematic review.
    Aragón ML; Pontes LF; Bichara LM; Flores-Mir C; Normando D
    Eur J Orthod; 2016 Aug; 38(4):429-34. PubMed ID: 27266879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Accuracy of 4 digital scanning systems on prepared teeth digitally isolated from a complete dental arch.
    Medina-Sotomayor P; Pascual-Moscardo A; Camps A I
    J Prosthet Dent; 2019 May; 121(5):811-820. PubMed ID: 30598308
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Evaluation of the fit of zirconia copings fabricated by direct and indirect digital scanning procedures.
    Lee B; Oh KC; Haam D; Lee JH; Moon HS
    J Prosthet Dent; 2018 Aug; 120(2):225-231. PubMed ID: 29428522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Effect of scan substrates on accuracy of 7 intraoral digital impression systems using human maxilla model.
    Bocklet C; Renne W; Mennito A; Bacro T; Latham J; Evans Z; Ludlow M; Kelly A; Nash J
    Orthod Craniofac Res; 2019 May; 22 Suppl 1():168-174. PubMed ID: 31074138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The accuracy of the CAD system using intraoral and extraoral scanners for designing of fixed dental prostheses.
    Shimizu S; Shinya A; Kuroda S; Gomi H
    Dent Mater J; 2017 Jul; 36(4):402-407. PubMed ID: 28302948
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Generation and evaluation of 3D digital casts of maxillary defects based on multisource data registration: A pilot clinical study.
    Ye H; Ma Q; Hou Y; Li M; Zhou Y
    J Prosthet Dent; 2017 Dec; 118(6):790-795. PubMed ID: 28449864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.